Bad science kills & injures

[Oddball]

The high prices are because BigBureacrat costs big bucks.

A market-based outfit like Underwriters Laboratories could fill the role of the FDA and slash costs by at least 1/2.

The fees going to the FDA for FDA approval is miniscule compared to the cost to pay patietns, doctors, etc to perform the clinical trials. Along with manufacturing costs, and high cost for doing research.

Who is it that mandates the avalanche of requirements to test new medications and devices?

And what of those that fail to make it through the approval process?...Is that any cheaper?

 

[Dr Gregg]

The high prices are because BigBureacrat costs big bucks.

A market-based outfit like Underwriters Laboratories could fill the role of the FDA and slash costs by at least 1/2.

The fees going to the FDA for FDA approval is miniscule compared to the cost to pay patietns, doctors, etc to perform the clinical trials. Along with manufacturing costs, and high cost for doing research.

Who is it that mandates the avalanche of requirements to test new medications and devices?

And what of those that fail to make it through the approval process?...Is that any cheaper?

What exactly is your point? That they should require extensive testing? I fail to see how an organization other than the FDA can lower the cost of drug development unless you are saying they should do less testing. And that would lead to even more harmful drugs on the market. The public already ignorantly think that drugs aren't safe and enough isn't being done to test them, so can't imagine limiting the number of testing required would do any better. It would put us at even more risk. And many times you need to large number of patients to get statistical significance to know that what your results are factual.

 

[RodISHI]

Let's try to stay at the original OP. "BAD SCIENCE" kills and injures. This headline makes no mention of all science killing and injuring. Further, I'll share an example of why I don't think ALL SCIENCE is bad. Rod is my husband. He was born in Houston, Texas in 1950's. I'm sure there were a lot of fine doctors and facilities available to his family in Houston even as far back as 1950's. Unknown to Rod's parents, he was born with a birth defect which was not discovered until the mid 1960's.

His teachers documented throughout his first four years in school that while he was well behaved and not problematic he was however, prone to periods of apathy and at times seemed disinterested in his school work. There were several teachers who accused him of day dreaming and being inattentive while in their class.

One of his teachers had an idea to move him up to the front of the class on a seating chart and his grades and cooperation in class were noted as marked improvement. The school nurse's office was directly across the hall from where Rod's chair was and she had a clear view of him while in this class. This nurse who was provided as a public service to the school was observant enough to watch him over time and it was her decision that he should undergo a hearing test which she herself administered at the school with very limited resources.

Lo and behold it appeared that Rod was fighting a losing battle with his hearing. He was never allowed to get his head wet or go swimming with the other kids or to do many other things with his five sisters and other kids. By the time he had entered the fifth grade he was convinced that he was stupid from alot of teachers and his dad I might add that he really was not that interested in school.

Within a year of this dear angel of a school nurse having diagnosed him as being severely hearing impaired he was sent to a doctor who had been studying a procedure which is now done in most clinics in less than two hours. However, for Rod; he was the guinea pig who they used to perfect bilateral tympanum surgery (to repair a child's hearing that was born without ear drums). He spent months at the university hospitals as a child. Surgeries and techniques perfected with him as the recipient that others could have that same benefit.

These doctors and nurses that cared for him were professionals beyond reproach. We ask now where did all these true professionals go? This procedure that was done is in medical journals and on film concerning this procedure for those who want to look into it more.

The one thing that his parents were offered was informed consent. There were no guarantees nor were there any blue sky promises made to his parents. The doctors did not deny Rod or his parents full and complete informed consent. The doctors left no doubt that the procedure came with a risk of his death. It now being almost fifty years later I doubt any of you on this website can know his joy from being able to hear his grand children tell him "I love you grampa."

To say that myself and/or Rod does not believe in science or that we are scare mongers against it is simply unfair and blatantly wrong. What we need are those among us with our lives in their hands who are morally sound and ethically bound. What we do not need is a crop of money hungry educated idiots who will sell not only themselves but their patients down the shitter for a few bucks.

That is a problem rampant in the pharmaceutical industry and most industries as a whole. The bottom line you say, is profit. Maybe so in the eyes of some but I would prefer to talk with a surgeon, nurse or care giver who is compassionate and not on the take for a few bucks or bio-tech engineers and policy makers that will obscure information that people have a right to know and make these things mandatory on an unsuspecting public. Bad science people. Bad science.

Nothing was held back concerning the risks to Rod when he was a child and he knew them as well right along with his mother and dad. So take your anti science accusations against myself and him and stick them where the sun don't shine if you really believe that is the way we feel.

Using millions or thousands or even hundreds of children or adults as guinea pigs without that same comprehensive informed consent that was readily available to Rod and his family in the mid 1960's is in no way ethical, moral or acceptable. Our policy makers need to return to the basics and give up their quest for money at any and all cost and the prestige they think comes with it. If our policy makers, agencies and leaders want the people to trust them they are going to have to go back and earn that trust again. Hiding or obscuring information from the public will not accomplish anything except furthering the damage to the public's trust.

 

[uscitizen]

What about the direct to customer advertising costs for prescription drugs?

 

[Valerie]

YouTube - Banning DiHydrogen Monoxide - Penn and Teller

That's great!

 

[RodISHI]

FDA has its share of fuck-ups, for sure. And, some of those were in gross violation of ethics rules. Anyway, luckily the FDA successes outweigh their screw-ups.

It's not the FDA itself, but most of the time an issue comes up its unethical actions by the pharm companies.BUt they will end up getting screwed in the long run so not many companies are going to fuck around with fudging or hiding results, as it can lead to prison time for nthose involved.

Also,. the nature of drugs (hence why they continue to monitor it when it gets to market) is that people will have bad side effects, albiet a tiny amount

Seriously, some employees of the FDA had a history of accepting a few choice ... ahem ... 'gifts' before there was a crackdown on ethics during the last administration. Most of that bad blood is gone - retired, asked to leave, made the choice that keeping their investments was more desirable than keeping a government job, etc. - and the FDA is trying to reclaim its once honorable reputation.

To the topic, the bad science is the claim that the science indicates that mercury-based preservatives in vaccines causes harm at the recommended doses. The science does not support that at all.

What is up with all the anti-chemistry threads, Ro?

First I'll answer your question. I am fed up with the lies coming out of our government agencies.

Second let me address your claim of a crackdown at "FDA trying to reclaim its once honorable reputation". I believe you may be in error due to the information I have been finding, including the most recent email I received a few moments ago. Just because USDA/FDA approves something does not mean it is in the best interest of the health overall public health and welfare.

Copy of the email that has me extremely miffed. USDA/FDA is going to approve of this even though they know damn well that these seeds will spread and infect every bit of viable natural alfalfa out here. It appears the rule of democratic law, our constitution and inalienable rights means jack to USDA/FDA and freedom of choice is sure not on their agenda! I do not consider infecting the whole environment with chemicals and fake seeds that will invade every natural hay crop. And they make no mention of the custom haying contractors who will be spreading these GM/GMO seed infested crop residues to non GM/GMO croplands. These GM/GMO infested crop residues will be present in the hay conditioning machines, the mowing machines, the balers, even the hay forks and any handling equipment used in the production of hay. Not to mention the seeds, the pollen and anything else that rides on the wind can infect surrounding croplands. They are ignoring court adjudication in favor of pushing Monsanto seeds and products on everyone whether they want them or not. This is being done not as a favor to the public nor to assist the private family farmer. This is being done primarily and systematically for big agri-biz corporations and the pockets of bought off bureaucrats. If the people say they don't want this what part of no does our government not understand? Either these politicians and bureaucrats will represent the voters and the people from their represented districts or the people will rise up in full rebellion. It does not take a genius to understand that people are becoming fed up with big government and repressive backdoor politics. I think the government is well aware of this anger otherwise not all of us out here who are pitching a bitch would be called potential terrorist. Enough is enough!

Call your Senators and Representative today and say
“USDA must not approve GE alfalfa!”

Monsanto wants to sell its genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa and wants the USDA to approve its permit application, but consumers, farmers, dairies, and food companies don’t want GE alfalfa plants and seeds released into the environment.

USDA’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) admits that if GE alfalfa is approved:

* GE Contamination of non-GE and organic alfalfa crops will occur
* GE contamination will economically impact small and family farmers
* Foreign export markets will be at risk due to rejection of GE contaminated products
* Farmers will be forced to use more toxic herbicides to remove old stands of alfalfa

Yet, unbelievably, USDA has decided that these impacts are insignificant! And, USDA intends to approve Monsanto’s Roundup Ready™ GE alfalfa anyway.

Call your Congressional Representatives today and ask them to hold USDA accountable by contacting Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack and urging him to deny approval of Monsanto's GE alfalfa! Call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard: (202)224-3121 and ask for your Senator/Representative’s office. If you do not know who they are click here to look them up

. Speak with the agriculture staff person or leave a message. Tell them that you DO NOT support the deregulation of GE alfalfa, for the following reasons:

* GE contamination of non-GE and organic crops would be inevitable
* You won’t buy products that are GE-contaminated
* Alfalfa is a major food source for livestock and GE alfalfa would destroy the integrity of organic dairy products
* You support the rights of farmers to grow the crops of their choice, and GE contamination makes that impossible
* GE crops increase pesticide use, harming human health and the environment
* Ask your Representative and Senators to contact Secretary Vilsack and urge him to deny USDA approval of Monsanto's GE alfalfa

Then email us at [email protected] and tell us who you called and let us know what kind of response you got!

Background

In 2006, the Center for Food Safety (CFS) sued the Department of Agriculture (USDA) for its illegal approval of Monsanto’s genetically engineered (GE) Roundup Ready alfalfa. USDA failed to conduct an environmental impact statement (EIS) before deregulating the crop, as required by law. An EIS is a rigorous analysis of the potential significant environmental, health, and economic impacts of a federal decision, mandated under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The federal courts sided with CFS and banned GE alfalfa until the USDA fully analyzed the impacts of the GE plant on the environment, farmers, and the public in an EIS.

USDA released its draft EIS on December 14, 2009. A 75-day comment period is now open until 3 March, 2010. CFS has begun analyzing the EIS and it is clear that the USDA has not taken the concerns of non-GE alfalfa farmers, dairies, exporters, retailers or consumers into consideration in its recommendation to approve the commercial sale (deregulation) of GE alfalfa. In fact, the EIS states that consumers don't care if their organic food is GE contaminated and neither do organic farmers, as long as farmers employ the organic practices required under the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA). Obviously, this is not true and we need to push our Congressional representatives to call upon USDA to deny the approval of GE alfalfa.

For more talking points and links to review the EIS and other documents, click here

, or copy and paste this URL into your browser's address bar: Tell Congress to Hold USDA Accountable

Forced vaccinations. Making something mandatory whether one wants it or not sounds like force to me. If it is not forced and is not in fact mandatory then where are all of our alternatives? Who hid the alternatives list? If they didn't hide it where is it? Anybody have that website showing alternatives available to those who don't want this shit?

Mandatory Vaccines Override Parental Rights
In 2007, Texas Governor Rick Perry signed a law requiring young girls to receive Gardisol, a vaccine that claims to prevent cervical cancer. The outcry by parents was instant and overwhelming, especially when it became clear that Gov. Perry had benefited financially from Merck, manufacturer of Gardisol

Readying Americans for Dangerous, Mandatory Vaccinations


At least three US federal laws should concern all Americans and suggest what may be coming - mandatory vaccinations for hyped, non-existant threats, like H1N1 (Swine Flu). Vaccines and drugs like Tamiflu endanger human health but are hugely profitable to drug company manufacturers.

The Project BioShield Act of 2004 (S. 15) became law on July 21, 2004 "to provide protections and countermeasures against chemical, radiological, or nuclear agents that may be used in a terrorist attack against the United States by giving the National Institutes of Health contracting flexibility, infrastructure improvements, and expediting the scientific peer review process, and streamlining the Food and Drug Administration approval process of countermeasures."

In other words, the FDA may now recklessly approve inadequately tested, potentially dangerous vaccines and other drugs if ever the Secretaries of Health and Human Services (HHS) or Defense (DOD) declare a national emergency, whether or not one exists and regardless of whether treatments available are safe and effective. Around $6 billion or more will be spent to develop, produce, and stockpile vaccines and other drugs to counteract claimed bioterror agents.

The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act slipped under the radar when George Bush signed it into law as part of the 2006 Defense Appropriations Act (HR 2863). It lets the HHS Secretary declare any disease an epidemic or national emergency requiring mandatory vaccinations. Nothing in the Act lists criteria that warrant a threat. Also potential penalties aren't specified for those who balk, but very likely they'd include quarantine and possible fines.

Or how about FDA raids on Amish farms and businesses...
http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...utomatic-rifles-entered-the-private-home.html


Is this FDA cleaning up it's act?

Bumping this thread back up. When did FDA gain the power to invade private property without a warrant?

FDA Invades Non-Commercial Amish Farm in PA
Published on 02-16-2010
Kinzers, PA – At 9:40 a.m. Thursday, February 4, only a few miles from the scene of the Nickel Mines Amish massacre of 2006, another drama against the Amish began as agents of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) came onto the property of Amish farmer Dan Allgyer, without permission, claiming to be conducting an investigation.

Agents Joshua Schafer and Deborah Haney, from the Delaware FDA office, drove past Allgyer’s “No Trespassing” signs and up his driveway almost to his barn, where Allgyer happened to be outside. Allgyer approached the car, the agents got out and Allgyer asked them why they were there. They produced a piece of paper, asked Allgyer if he was Dan Allgyer, which Allgyer confirmed, asked him his middle initial and phone number, entered the information on the paper, told Allgyer they were there to do an inspection and started reading the paper to him, saying it gave them jurisdiction to be there..............

Yeah right FDA has really cleaned up its act hasn't it?

 

[Si modo]

Boy, Ro...you are ALL over the place. You need to focus a bit.

My comment about the FDA was in reference to drugs and their meeting the requirements without bribery involved. I have to wonder what the heck your Amish story has to do with that.

I mentioned the fact that claims that mercury-based preservatives cause autism and/or other disorders at the doses in vaccines is not backed up by any science and you bring up forced vaccinations? That has no relevance to my statement about the science at all.

And if you now want to discuss genetically engineered crops, I'll be pleased to do so. Just, try to use science for support, please.

 

[Oddball]

The fees going to the FDA for FDA approval is miniscule compared to the cost to pay patietns, doctors, etc to perform the clinical trials. Along with manufacturing costs, and high cost for doing research.

Who is it that mandates the avalanche of requirements to test new medications and devices?

And what of those that fail to make it through the approval process?...Is that any cheaper?

What exactly is your point? That they should require extensive testing? I fail to see how an organization other than the FDA can lower the cost of drug development unless you are saying they should do less testing. And that would lead to even more harmful drugs on the market. The public already ignorantly think that drugs aren't safe and enough isn't being done to test them, so can't imagine limiting the number of testing required would do any better. It would put us at even more risk. And many times you need to large number of patients to get statistical significance to know that what your results are factual.

I highly doubt your doomsday scenario would come about, as the recreational drug market is entirely unregulated and millions of people take those every day, yet we don't have masses of people keeling over from bad drugs.

If that isn't statistically significant, nothing is.

 

[RodISHI]

Boy, Ro...you are ALL over the place. You need to focus a bit.

My comment about the FDA was in reference to drugs and their meeting the requirements without bribery involved. I have to wonder what the heck your Amish story has to do with that.

I mentioned the fact that claims that mercury-based preservatives cause autism and/or other disorders at the doses in vaccines is not backed up by any science and you bring up forced vaccinations? That has no relevance to my statement about the science at all.

And if you now want to discuss genetically engineered crops, I'll be pleased to do so. Just, try to use science for support, please.

Like I said I am miffed. FDA is destroying through its policy decisions in favor of monopolies every basic freedom we enjoy in this country. They are tearing down freedom. That is our basic right to make choices. It is not just all over the board, it is they are stealing away every bit of nature from the common man.

You say "that mercury-based preservatives cause autism and/or other disorders at the doses in vaccines is not backed up by any science". Yet I have already listed study cases and research links at the CDC. The evidence is already out there and stated in certain CDC pamphlets and studies of these vaccines. Young people have documented in videos the damaging affects that they have suffered from vaccines. Look and you will find they are out there and readily available and are speaking up about what happened to them. Unless you are willing to take their place in their and their families suffering you have not one leg to stand on. If you think that what happened to them cannot happen to you, you are more than naive. Much more.

The Amish story is just one story of force by illegal means perpetrated by FDA agents. Have our trespass and search warrant laws been abolished? You asked what has me going and I have given you a few examples. Rod owns an acreage here that grows hay and lots of it. It also grows natural food, natural medicinal flowers & herbs. Keep in mind that these plants grow naturally and without any pesticide or fertilizers. Why would he want it to be contaminated with a GM crop? Why would and why should we abandon or relinquish our right to produce and use natural herbs and hay or food crops in place of unproven pharmaceuticals and unnatural foods? What gives this government agency the right to help take away that which is growing naturally and diminish our freedom of choice in what we grow? As long as these crops or plants are legal in the eyes of the law we should have the freedom to choose whether we want to grow them or not. Monsanto is not happy with growing the plants. They want to own them all.

FDA is complicit with big business, bureaucrats and certain politicians in establishing policies which will destroy our ability to enforce his patent rights to the land he owns. It is no longer confined to agriculture as these companies are pushing for acceptance in more than just agricultural products now. They are demanding and are being given free reign over the rights of private land owners who do not want anything to do with them. Do you truly believe that this is all being done wholly in the name of good science? I find it hard to believe you are that naive.

I'm not talking about a small garden patch here. The FDA and their cohorts are not seeking to protect and grant us full use and enjoyment of this land. They are seeking to circumvent his patent rights which are senior to Monsanto's or any other. There is a world wide push by corporate entities and multi-national corporations to claim and establish their patent rights over his. You can research land patents on your own time. I'm not going to do it for you. The land he has was patented during WW II for a reason. I suggest you research the matter for yourself to ascertain why and how these patented lands were issued. What you find may astound you.

There lives among us studious God fearing hard working people who due to their beliefs and faith do not grow, cultivate or consume plants for food or pharmaceuticals which are not natural. If we the people do not stand up for them what right do we have to complain when the government comes for ours too? The time is now come when the government together with big business wants it all!

 

[Si modo]

No, Ro. Here is the science on vaccines and autism, not anecdotes:

Autism and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine: no epidemiological evidence for a causal association


ProfBrent Taylor FRCPCHa, Corresponding Author Contact Information, Elizabeth Miller FRCPathb, CPaddy Farrington PhDc, Maria-Christina Petropoulos MRCPa, Isabelle Favot-Mayaud MDa, Jun Li PhDa and Pauline A Waight BScb

aDepartment of Community Child Health, Royal Free Campus, Royal Free and University College Medical School, University College London, London NW3 2QG, UK

bImmunisation Division, Public Health Laboratory Service Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, London

cDepartment of Statistics, Open University

Summary
Background

We undertook an epidemiological study to investigate whether measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine may be causally associated with autism.
Methods

Children with autism born since 1979 were identified from special needs/disability registers and special schools in eight North Thames health districts, UK. Information from clinical records was linked to immunisation data held on the child health computing system. We looked for evidence of a change in trend in incidence or age at diagnosis associated with the introduction of MMR vaccination to the UK in 1988. Clustering of onsets within defined postvaccination periods was investigated by the case-series method.
Findings

We identified 498 cases of autism (261 of core autism, 166 of atypical autism, and 71 of Asperger's syndrome). In 293 cases the diagnosis could be confirmed by the criteria of the International Classification of Diseases, tenth revision (ICD10: 214 [82%] core autism, 52 [31%] atypical autism, 27 [38%] Asperger's syndrome). There was a steady increase in cases by year of birth with no sudden “step-up” or change in the trend line after the introduction of MMR vaccination. There was no difference in age at diagnosis between the cases vaccinated before or after 18 months of age and those never vaccinated. There was no temporal association between onset of autism within 1 or 2 years after vaccination with MMR (relative incidence compared with control period 0·94 [95% Cl 0·60–1·47] and 1·09 [0·79–1·52]). Developmental regression was not clustered in the months after vaccination (relative incidence within 2 months and 4 months after MMR vaccination 0·92 [0·38–2·21] and 1·00 [0·52–1·95]). No significant temporal clustering for age at onset of parental concern was seen for cases of core autism or atypical autism with the exception of a single interval within 6 months of MMR vaccination. This appeared to be an artifact related to the difficulty of defining precisely the onset of symptoms in this disorder.
Interpretation

Our analyses do not support a causal association between MMR vaccine and autism. If such an association occurs, it is so rare that it could not be identified in this large regional sample.

The Lancet

 

[RodISHI]

No, Ro. Here is the science on vaccines and autism, not anecdotes:

Autism and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine: no epidemiological evidence for a causal association


ProfBrent Taylor FRCPCHa, Corresponding Author Contact Information, Elizabeth Miller FRCPathb, CPaddy Farrington PhDc, Maria-Christina Petropoulos MRCPa, Isabelle Favot-Mayaud MDa, Jun Li PhDa and Pauline A Waight BScb

aDepartment of Community Child Health, Royal Free Campus, Royal Free and University College Medical School, University College London, London NW3 2QG, UK

bImmunisation Division, Public Health Laboratory Service Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, London

cDepartment of Statistics, Open University

Summary
Background

We undertook an epidemiological study to investigate whether measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine may be causally associated with autism.
Methods

Children with autism born since 1979 were identified from special needs/disability registers and special schools in eight North Thames health districts, UK. Information from clinical records was linked to immunisation data held on the child health computing system. We looked for evidence of a change in trend in incidence or age at diagnosis associated with the introduction of MMR vaccination to the UK in 1988. Clustering of onsets within defined postvaccination periods was investigated by the case-series method.
Findings

We identified 498 cases of autism (261 of core autism, 166 of atypical autism, and 71 of Asperger's syndrome). In 293 cases the diagnosis could be confirmed by the criteria of the International Classification of Diseases, tenth revision (ICD10: 214 [82%] core autism, 52 [31%] atypical autism, 27 [38%] Asperger's syndrome). There was a steady increase in cases by year of birth with no sudden “step-up” or change in the trend line after the introduction of MMR vaccination. There was no difference in age at diagnosis between the cases vaccinated before or after 18 months of age and those never vaccinated. There was no temporal association between onset of autism within 1 or 2 years after vaccination with MMR (relative incidence compared with control period 0·94 [95% Cl 0·60–1·47] and 1·09 [0·79–1·52]). Developmental regression was not clustered in the months after vaccination (relative incidence within 2 months and 4 months after MMR vaccination 0·92 [0·38–2·21] and 1·00 [0·52–1·95]). No significant temporal clustering for age at onset of parental concern was seen for cases of core autism or atypical autism with the exception of a single interval within 6 months of MMR vaccination. This appeared to be an artifact related to the difficulty of defining precisely the onset of symptoms in this disorder.
Interpretation

Our analyses do not support a causal association between MMR vaccine and autism. If such an association occurs, it is so rare that it could not be identified in this large regional sample.

The Lancet

You can take those vaccines if you want. If you have kids you can have them piped full of it. What you do not have the right to do is make anyone else take them. Enough said.

 

[Si modo]

No, Ro. Here is the science on vaccines and autism, not anecdotes:

Autism and measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine: no epidemiological evidence for a causal association


ProfBrent Taylor FRCPCHa, Corresponding Author Contact Information, Elizabeth Miller FRCPathb, CPaddy Farrington PhDc, Maria-Christina Petropoulos MRCPa, Isabelle Favot-Mayaud MDa, Jun Li PhDa and Pauline A Waight BScb

aDepartment of Community Child Health, Royal Free Campus, Royal Free and University College Medical School, University College London, London NW3 2QG, UK

bImmunisation Division, Public Health Laboratory Service Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, London

cDepartment of Statistics, Open University

Summary
Background

We undertook an epidemiological study to investigate whether measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine may be causally associated with autism.
Methods

Children with autism born since 1979 were identified from special needs/disability registers and special schools in eight North Thames health districts, UK. Information from clinical records was linked to immunisation data held on the child health computing system. We looked for evidence of a change in trend in incidence or age at diagnosis associated with the introduction of MMR vaccination to the UK in 1988. Clustering of onsets within defined postvaccination periods was investigated by the case-series method.
Findings

We identified 498 cases of autism (261 of core autism, 166 of atypical autism, and 71 of Asperger's syndrome). In 293 cases the diagnosis could be confirmed by the criteria of the International Classification of Diseases, tenth revision (ICD10: 214 [82%] core autism, 52 [31%] atypical autism, 27 [38%] Asperger's syndrome). There was a steady increase in cases by year of birth with no sudden “step-up” or change in the trend line after the introduction of MMR vaccination. There was no difference in age at diagnosis between the cases vaccinated before or after 18 months of age and those never vaccinated. There was no temporal association between onset of autism within 1 or 2 years after vaccination with MMR (relative incidence compared with control period 0·94 [95% Cl 0·60–1·47] and 1·09 [0·79–1·52]). Developmental regression was not clustered in the months after vaccination (relative incidence within 2 months and 4 months after MMR vaccination 0·92 [0·38–2·21] and 1·00 [0·52–1·95]). No significant temporal clustering for age at onset of parental concern was seen for cases of core autism or atypical autism with the exception of a single interval within 6 months of MMR vaccination. This appeared to be an artifact related to the difficulty of defining precisely the onset of symptoms in this disorder.
Interpretation

Our analyses do not support a causal association between MMR vaccine and autism. If such an association occurs, it is so rare that it could not be identified in this large regional sample.

The Lancet

You can take those vaccines if you want. If you have kids you can have them piped full of it. What you do not have the right to do is make anyone else take them. Enough said.

Perhaps enough said from you, but to be crystal clear, I have never argued for (or against) forced vaccines here. I have argued the claims that the science indicates that they cause autism. The science doesn't.

 

[RodISHI]

I have always heard a picture is worth a thousand words. In many cases I agree with that.

 

[Si modo]

I have always heard a picture is worth a thousand words. In many cases I agree with that.

Yet, the statistical analysis indicates no causation. Pictures are fine, but thorough analyses can't be beat.

 

[RodISHI]

The Amish and Autism: Can Mercury in Vaccines Cause Autism? Odd only a few cases of Autism in Amish children and two of these cases had been vaccinated, the other lived near an abandon Mercury mine, WOW!

After writing my last article about vaccines and autism, I decided to do a little research and look for a group of society that does not vaccinate. I not only found one, I found two. I discovered some interesting
information regarding autism among the Amish and mercury associated with Thermasol. I also found studies from another group of children that had not been vaccinated, and the results were stunningly similar: no vaccines, and no autism. Hmmm. But the testing paid for by the pharmaceutical companies seems to be conclusive that there is no connection between vaccines and autism..... continued at link....

 

[L.K.Eder]

it is hard to find stuff, if you aren't looking for it.

 

[elvis]

it is hard to find stuff, if you aren't looking for it.

I'm looking for the needle in the haystack.

 

[L.K.Eder]

it is hard to find stuff, if you aren't looking for it.

I'm looking for the needle in the haystack.

incidences of needles found in haystacks rise with number of people looking and time and effort spent looking.

incidences of needles found in haystacks when not looking for said needle = app. zero.

effect of amount of mercury in and surrounding the haystack on incidences found =

 

[RodISHI]

it is hard to find stuff, if you aren't looking for it.

I'm looking for the needle in the haystack.

30,000+ children no vaccines, no autism. Pretty relevant IMO.

 

[Ravi]

I just read, for the umpteenth time, a statement that "the Amish don't vaccinate, and that's why there are no Amish people with autism." This statement draws, in part, from claims by Age of Autism writer Dan Olmsted - and, at least in this case, Mr. Olmsted is wrong.

I got my first inkling that this myth was, in fact, a myth, when I read this piece in the Combatting Autism from Within website:
The idea that the Amish do not vaccinate their children is untrue,” says Dr. Kevin Strauss, MD, a pediatrician at the CSC. “We run a weekly vaccination clinic and it’s very busy.” He says Amish vaccinations rates are lower than the general population’s, but younger Amish are more likely to be vaccinated than older generations.

Strauss also sees plenty of Amish children showing symptoms of autism. “Autism isn’t a diagnosis - it’s a description of behavior. We see autistic behaviors along with seizure disorders or mental retardation or a genetic disorder, where the autism is part of a more complicated clinical spectrum.” Fragile X syndrome and Retts is also common among the clinic’s patients.

Do The Amish Vaccinate? Indeed They Do, AND Their Autism Rates May be Lower