US National Public Radio – “Worries About Autism Link Still Hang Over Vaccines”

According to the latest NPR-Thomson Reuters Health Poll conducted for US National Public Radio 46% of Americans polled were concerned about a fear of side effects of vaccines and 47% of respondents had concerns about uncertainty about long-term health effects.  Autism remains a top worry, with 21 percent of respondents saying they believe autism is linked to vaccines. About 7 percent believe in a link between vaccines and diabetes.

Among households with children under 18, 30 percent were concerned about the safety or value of vaccines.

Read more here:

Worries About Autism Link Still Hang Over Vaccines – by Scott Hensley – US National Public Radio – September 29, 2011

5 Responses

  1. It is unjust to use the word “worry” when people are genuinely and seriously concerned. There is good reason to be concerned about the link between vaccines and autism.
    People are generally more informed as time goes by and have greater access to reliable, unbiased information. More and more people, including doctors and other health experts question the official information and safety statistics.
    In addition, numerous competent experts maintain that the concept of herd immunity relates to naturally acquired diseases and that vaccine induced herd immunity does not exist.
    The issue of widespread corruption involves manipulation of clinical trial results, research studies and statistics. It is well known that there are close networks between the pharmaceutical industry, doctors, health authorities and politicians. Therefore everyone is right in questioning all aspects of information before considering to take any vaccine.

  2. …and that’s no surprise.

    Recently the British Medical Journal ran a series of articles penned by a freelance “Investigative” journalist Brian Deer claiming that there was a conspiracy to extort money from the British public via a complex web of litigation and research.

    The first time that the BMJ had dabbled in investigative journalism and apparently the topic of some debate amongst BMJ staff. Three senior editors though seem to have had their way and the articles with accompanying accusations commissioned, written and sent off to the printers … those three senior editors promised the common reader and the general public that this was a solid fact based series of articles with accompanying documentation and evidence. Conflicts of interests were duly recorded and the editors had been diligent as good editors should…

    The first small cracks appeared in the area of Conflict of Interest, when the BMJ editors failed to acknowledge their own COI in regards to pharmaceutical funding and income streams arriving from advertising etc from vaccine manufacturers GlaxoSmithKline and Merck.

    After some pressure from advocates those clear COI’s were duly recognised but not without what has become a puzzling ‘apologist polemic’ from Senior Editor in Charge Fiona Godlee.

    “We didn’t declare these competing interests because it didn’t occur to us to do so.”

    Well thousands … if not tens of thousands of the general public are still quite aware that this story was and is about MMR , Vaccine Safety and Vaccine Manufacturers. Most notably GlaxoSmithKline and Merck.

    Incredible …perhaps too much Yes Minister. But it gets decidedly worse..

    also in the Editorial a mumps outbreak in Essen Germany was referenced as an example of the damage that this issue had caused to the UK public.

    Here it is here … (In regards to mumps)

    “Any consequence of a fall in uptake after 1998 may not become apparent until the cohorts of children affected reach adolescence. One clue comes from an outbreak in a school in Essen, Germany, attended by children whose parents were opposed to vaccinations. Of the 71 children infected with mumps, 68 had not been immunised.”

    Spotlight on measles 2010: measles outbreak in a mainly unvaccinated community in Essen, Germany, March-June 2010. Euro Surveill2010;15:2.

    The thorough reader would note (something that escaped three senior editors)

    1. Measles (wrong infectious disease)

    and an even more critical reader would have noted.

    2. Germany is not the UK

    3. Germany has different vaccine schedule which in fact shows a percentage range of uptake from 94% to 96% (2005 – 2010)

    4. The outbreak notably occurred in Steiner / Waldorf Schools and that the philosophy of Anthroposophy has been around since 1912.

    One vigilant reader did spot this mistake and wrote an appropriate ‘look here you’ve made a mistake letter” on the 4th February – Correction made ….well no. No correction …no acknowledgment … it just sits there a simple error of fact.

    One supposes that TWO correction notices on the same editorial would look decidedly – ODD.

    Speaking of odd, another odd moment came just recently in fact about 11.35am Tuesday, September 06, 2011. US Time Zone. Eastern.

    Fortunately it was caught on video as it streamed out over the ether to a world wide audience of several.

    Presentation of BMJ articles re : MMR
    National Institute of Health USA

    On explaining to an eminent audience made of medical professors and researchers “that Conflict of Interest” this is what Fiona Godlee said …

    “And the third which I didn’t say at the time because I was afraid it would make me … look stupid is I didn’t know that MMR was made by GSK or Merck; I just didn’t happen to know that.”

    “…it was ignorance…. but it does show you how we can all be caught out … and umm that’s fair enough.”

    Silence … silence.

    There is an expectation from the general public and medical professionals that leaders of public debate have a deep knowledge of the issues they make substantial stances on.

    Basic errors or ignorance of subject matter on some simple concepts goes to the heart of and credibility of, varying statements promising the common reader that all articles had been fact checked for accuracy and reviewed by editorial staff. This was promulgated not only in the United Kingdom but also overseas to various media outlets.

    It erodes public trust.

    There is now a great deal of uncertainty as to what has been undertaken by the BMJ and its senior editors in ensuring all issues presented are based on indisputable factual basis. That when material is interpreted it is done so in the true scientific spirit of “objectivity”.

    The BMJ needs to take this criticism, well intentioned as it is in its stride and take action , not words.

    1. The correction of referencing error as noted above

    2. The transparent publication of the peer review process.

    3. The transparent publication on the Ethical Approvals assigned to the author of the articles that contain patient information.

    4. The transparent publication of any referenced material inclusive of material directed to web page of author

    Research Integrity , Health and Safety and perhaps even Autism aetiology all may hinge on the way this debate is moved forward.

    It could be in a framework of co-operative deployment of all those with varying views on this matter.

    Autism is perhaps the number one paediatric issue in medicine and also education. Like cancer it could be said that not one person is untouched by this neurodevelopmental disorder, mothers , fathers , brothers , sisters , relatives, school friends …

    When searching for information that may provide a clearer picture in regards to Autism, it’s care and treatment a simple search on the BMJ website reveals very little substance except for an unhealthy focus on a small team of eminent researchers that had investigated ‘real’ patients and their physiology. Postulating a hypothesis surrounding immune system dysfunction and paediatric medicines that work directly on the immune system.

    It is another criticism but it can be fixed – publication of a continuing series of articles that outline the latest research findings would be invaluable for the General Practitioner whose duty it is to care for the patient and families of ASD children.

    Immune system dysfunction, neuroinflammation and gut pathology have all been the focus of recent research and the foundation of new understandings of the complexity of neurodevelopmental disorders “umbrelled” under the term ASD.

    New understanding on Autism Type (Genome) has just been published at the Asia Pacific Autism Conference … one appears ‘Classic’ the other group has immune system dysfunction.

    The California Twins Study found that the environmental impact on Autism is around 55% compared to genetic ‘input’ of around 37%.

    These type of issues cannot be held back …

    Time to move substantially forward …



    Rapid Response Communication – COI

  3. Vaccine Compensation

    “At least a dozen countries or states in the world have introduced vaccine injury compensation schemes.”

    “The most important justification, however, is an ethical argument from justice and equity: introduction of a vaccine injury compensation scheme acknowledges the unique situation that routine childhood immunization is a public health measure, given and accepted in good faith, that may occasionally damage the recipient.”;jsessionid=986E8F8E637905432BD3D0B28008ABE3.d03t04

    “However vaccines are not without risks and it is commonly accepted that, regardless of proper design, manufacture and delivery, adverse events occur following vaccination although serious adverse events are rare.”

    “an individual occasionally bears a significant burden for the benefit provided to the rest of the population. Although these vaccine-related adverse events occur occasionally due to negligence, more often there is no clearly attributable fault.”

    “Without evidence of clear negligence, it is difficult to obtain compensation through traditional legal mechanisms. Recognizing this, several countries have implemented vaccine-injury compensation programmes.These programmes reflect a belief that it is fair and reasonable that a community that is protected by a vaccination programme accepts responsibility for and provides compensation to those who are injured by it.”

    “Ethicist Michelle Mello argues that solidarity means members of a community do not bear the risks of vaccination alone. Vaccine injuries can be severe and complex, and are often suffered by children who require a lifetime of care and may not qualify for other benefits under accident insurance schemes. In a vaccination programme, the injured and uninjured pay unequal shares of the social cost of producing the social good of herd immunity.”

    “an individual occasionally bears a significant burden for the benefit provided to the rest of the population”

    Ethically this should mean to health authorities that compensation cases are met with concern and objective investigation and positive support for children and parents/ caregivers.

    These are the underlying ethical and moral principles of medicine as espoused in the oath each doctor takes.

    This adversarial approach to parents advocating for their children demeans the meaning of ‘community’.

    We are all members of the wider community

  4. Vaccine induced herd immunity does not exist.

  5. Puzzling Evidence – BMJ 21st July 2001

    Liam Smeeth, Clinical Research Fellow
    London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine

    “We agree with their conclusion that MMR cannot be the cause of this observed increase since the vaccine coverage remained constant over the same time. ”

    Smeeth who later undertook his own study was responding to this study …

    Mumps, measles, and rubella vaccine and the incidence of autism recorded by general practitioners: a time trend analysis

    Kaye et al

    “Our analysis of the risk of diagnosed autism for boys aged 2 to 5 years showed a progressive increase for each successive birth cohort from 1988 to 1993, during which time the prevalence of MMR vaccination was over 95%.”

    Here’s the graph … Nice straight blue line showing apparently OVER 95% uptake.

    …and here’s the Health Protection Authority HPA stats on MMR vaccine coverage

    1988 -1993

    1988 – 7% – over 95 ?
    1989 – 68% – over 95 ?
    1990 – 86 – over 95 ?
    1991 – 90 – over 95 ?
    1992 – 92 – over 95 ?
    1993 – 91% – over 95 ?

    Here’s a handy little tool for budding “statmagicians”

    Create a Graph (for kids)

    Have fun …I did


    Two researchers making very puzzling conclusions on data that appears to be invalid.

    I’m not a statisticians so I’m always happy to be corrected if I missed something … with of course preemptive apologies.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: