Heartland

I'm sure some of you will have seen this, but I think it's worth posting.

Background: In 1998 Andrew Wakefield (and others) published a paper in The Lancet linking the MMR vaccine with autism in 12 children. On the basis of this paper, the press whipped up an anti-vaccination storm that is still going on.

Because of this, 1998 MMR vaccination rates were at 93% and there were 56 cases of measles in the UK. In 2008 vaccination rates were below 80% and there were 1348 cases of measles, including two deaths.

Right from the beginning, there were doubts about Wakefield's research; no other research performed over the past ten years could find any link between MMR and autism, or even between vaccines and autism. Over this time, several of Wakefield's co-authors of the original paper have withdrawn their names from it -- effectively disowning the results -- due to concerns that the original research was flawed and misleading.

Now it has been alleged that not only was the original research flawed, but that Wakefield fraudulently changed and misreported results in his research.

Wakefield has links to a rival vaccine to the MMR jab, and with a group that had obtained legal aid to probe MMR for any evidence that could be used against the manufacturers. It is alleged that these conflicts of interest led him to commit the frauds.

If these allegations are true (and I see no reason to doubt them) it means that Wakefield is personally responsible for a more than twenty-fold increase in the number of measles cases, and for (at least) two deaths in the UK.

I think the CPS should investigate prosecuting this man

Interesting reading Mark. Especially as we opted out.

It's never too late to get kids vaccinated...

We considered getting the individual jabs, but went for the combined in the end.

Our daughter and her friend had a bad reaction to theirs (very painful, fever etc...) but our son (a couple of years later) got on fine with his. The bods in the clinic said the formula had been changed in between.

There's a guy at work who is convinced that the jab made his son autistic.

Harvey Winston wrote:There's a guy at work who is convinced that the jab made his son autistic.

My wife did a lot of research (she's the brains of the operation ) and concluded it would be safest to have the seperate jabs.
But a conversation with a chap at work who said the same made me think the decision was a lot easier.

Nice one Mr Fiend-Wakefield is a total cnut-we had the MMR for Loganberry and I crapped my pants, but the alternative was too much to think about. I saw the recent increase in measles and thought-thank God we did it. Small Mercy (Moonbump) will also be having the jab, to think that man has played with childrens lives makes my blood boil.

It's up to the individual parents, I don't have an issue with their personal choice just the numb-nuts that may influence them.

I'm publishing a paper on the benefits of giving a kicking to those that deserve it entitled: You're dance card is fully booked.
I hope the nation embraces it as the profound piece of literature it is....

I'd proof-read your paper before publishing weebles

Harvey Winston wrote:There's a guy at work who is convinced that the jab made his son autistic.

With the best will in the world... he is wrong. Vaccines don't cause autism.

But I don't want to call into question anybody's parenting.

===================================

Given a vaccination rate of around 95% you get what's called herd immunity -- the virus is effectively removed from circulation "in the wild". With herd immunity, people that haven't been vaccinated are safe too; there's no "wild virus" for them to catch. This is how smallpox and polio were defeated.

And there are valid reasons not to vaccinate: for example immuno-compromised individuals (e.g. transplant patients) usually can't have any jabs. And of course there are plenty of babies out there who are too young to have had any immunisations.

If there aren't too many moonbats refusing vaccinations for no good reason, they end up taking advantage of herd immunity, and are unlikely to catch the disease. But if you reach a critical mass of un-vaccinated people, all of a sudden herd immunity won't work any more. This is happening now. And it's killing children.

The fact that all this was based on one, isolated study of 12 children says it all really. I can't understand how anyone with an awareness of this could still take the "threat" seriously.
Autism is such a complex developmental disorder, and I expect that one day this particular furore will be viewed with the same attitude as a study that says picking your nose causes cancer.
I bet you could find 12 people with cancer and they'd all have picked their nose at least once in their life. Open and shut case I'd say.

markfiend wrote:

Harvey Winston wrote:There's a guy at work who is convinced that the jab made his son autistic.

With the best will in the world... he is wrong. Vaccines don't cause autism.

But I don't want to call into question anybody's parenting.

never say never...

maybe the kid had a weakness in his intestinal tract, isn't something like that one of the contributing factors? I must say I don't have complete trust in the medical profession, they do as well as science informs them, at that moment in time.

I'm not sure what The Times is reporting here. As they admit halfway through their article, it's five-year-old news and there's really nothing new as the hearing hasn't actually come to a conclusion yet. It looks like they're putting the story back into the public eye in preparation for the hearing's results - another case of the newspapers directing the news rather than vice versa.

However, markfiend's connecting the story to the measles pandemic (and it was officially classed as a pandemic in the UK as of last year) is the one thing the article didn't mention! The press has covered the pandemic itself but I haven't seen much being made of the connection to the MMR scare. Pretty shoddy journalism if you ask me.

Hom_Corleone wrote:Interesting reading Mark. Especially as we opted out.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/200 ... mr-vaccine

Govt. might stop unvaccinated children enrolling in school

Its a very interesting post, an interesting legal and moral discussion point:

If somebody knowingly makes a fraudulant statement, should they be held responsible for damage caused to those who act on that statement?

Something to chew on....

Harvey Winston wrote:never say never...

maybe the kid had a weakness in his intestinal tract, isn't something like that one of the contributing factors?

No it isn't. The evidence is unequivocal.

Vaccines. Do. Not. Cause. Autism.

Harvey Winston wrote:I must say I don't have complete trust in the medical profession, they do as well as science informs them, at that moment in time.

Well that's the thing isn't it? In the ten years since Wakefield's fraudulent research was published, all attempts to replicate the results have failed. There is no correlation between vaccines and autism rates (well, technically, some studies find a slightly negative correlation; IOW vaccinated kids might be slightly less likely to develop autism than unvaccinated children.)

That's the thing with science, it's endlessly self-correcting. Or as xkcd has it, Science. It works, bitches.

stufarq wrote:I'm not sure what The Times is reporting here. As they admit halfway through their article, it's five-year-old news and there's really nothing new

AFAIK the idea that Wakefield deliberately misrepresented his research (i.e. that he's actively fraudulent rather than just mistaken) is new. It's the first time I've seen it suggested at any rate.

stufarq wrote:I haven't seen much being made of the connection to the MMR scare

Well, it seems a fairly obvious connection to me...

markfiend wrote:

Harvey Winston wrote:I must say I don't have complete trust in the medical profession, they do as well as science informs them, at that moment in time.

Well that's the thing isn't it? In the ten years since Wakefield's fraudulent research was published, all attempts to replicate the results have failed. There is no correlation between vaccines and autism rates (well, technically, some studies find a slightly negative correlation; IOW vaccinated kids might be slightly less likely to develop autism than unvaccinated children.)

That's the thing with science, it's endlessly self-correcting. Or as xkcd has it, Science. It works, bitches.

self correcting? I agree with you that science makes mistakes.

You never know, in a further 10 years there may be a link discovered.

Harvey Winston wrote:I agree with you that science makes mistakes.

Way to take my words out of context.

There is no link. The science has been done again and again and again. The results are in. The hypothesis has been rejected.

There is no link between vaccines and autism.

Mark, is there any link between vaccines and autism?

I for one was really worried when this all kicked off.
Not because of the possible link (now disproved), but because of the drop-off in people taking up the vaccinations and the subsequent rise in measles cases.

Strange how every paper in the UK sang to the heavens about a possible link with autism and hyped up peoples fears in a most heinous way. And now it has been debunked? Nothing.

Thanks for the heads up Mark

markfiend wrote:

Harvey Winston wrote:I agree with you that science makes mistakes.

Way to take my words out of context.

Relax, I just love your phrase, I'm going to use it when talking about our IT development methodologies.

markfiend wrote:

stufarq wrote:I'm not sure what The Times is reporting here. As they admit halfway through their article, it's five-year-old news and there's really nothing new

AFAIK the idea that Wakefield deliberately misrepresented his research (i.e. that he's actively fraudulent rather than just mistaken) is new. It's the first time I've seen it suggested at any rate.

His conflict of interests was made public some time ago so it seemed implicit to me that the report was now seen as fraudulent but maybe this is the first time they've been able to say it outright without being sued. He is, after all, connected to a group of lawyers.

stufarq wrote:I haven't seen much being made of the connection to the MMR scare

Well, it seems a fairly obvious connection to me...[/quote]
Agreed. Which is why I'm surprised that the press haven't latched on to it. Surely it's a perfect story for them. Maybe they're embarrassed about the fact that they hyped up the MMR scare themselves. Wait - what am I saying? The press have no shame.

markfiend wrote: There is no link between vaccines and autism.

So They say.

Is there a Doctor in the house?

Harvey Winston wrote:Relax, I just love your phrase, I'm going to use it when talking about our IT development methodologies.

Cool. Sorry.

On the whole spreading of "childhood diseases" thing, I'm actually vaguely worried on a personal level. As far as I can remember I never had measles or mumps as a child, but I think I'm too old to have had the MMR when I was a baby. (Although I'm pretty sure I did have what we called "German Measles" -- which is rubella.) So I don't know whether I have any immunity to measles or mumps.

markfiend wrote:
On the whole spreading of "childhood diseases" thing, I'm actually vaguely worried on a personal level. As far as I can remember I never had measles or mumps as a child, but I think I'm too old to have had the MMR when I was a baby. (Although I'm pretty sure I did have what we called "German Measles" -- which is rubella.) So I don't know whether I have any immunity to measles or mumps.

oops, better get the breeding in quick, just in case

No fear

markfiend wrote:(...)

Given a vaccination rate of around 95% you get what's called herd immunity -- the virus is effectively removed from circulation "in the wild". With herd immunity, people that haven't been vaccinated are safe too; there's no "wild virus" for them to catch. This is how smallpox and polio were defeated.

And there are valid reasons not to vaccinate: for example immuno-compromised individuals (e.g. transplant patients) usually can't have any jabs. And of course there are plenty of babies out there who are too young to have had any immunisations.

If there aren't too many moonbats refusing vaccinations for no good reason, they end up taking advantage of herd immunity, and are unlikely to catch the disease. But if you reach a critical mass of un-vaccinated people, all of a sudden herd immunity won't work any more. This is happening now. And it's killing children.

/signed


Similar problem as in Germany... I currently read that there is still a certain number of parents who think, measles were harmless, so children wouldn´t need that vaccination. Someone should tell them that measles can even be lethal...

Well, I´m glad that noone has bothered to spread that Wakefield stuff here ... otherwise the number of children without vaccination would be even higher.