Recently a new study came out which suggested that changes to the brains of autistic children might be detectable as early as 6 months of age. Steve Novella has covered this particular study at his Neurologica blog so there is no need to repeat what he said there. Predictably, the anti-vaccination crowd has come out restating their belief that vaccinations are still to blame. Now, to be fair nothing in this study proves that vaccines cannot cause, or have any effect on, autism. All it says is that it may be possible to notice differences in the brain as early as 6 months of age, and even at that it does not provide a diagnostic tool, due to its size (92 infants) and limitations. It certainly points to an interesting direction, but I do not believe any strong conclusions can be drawn from it.
If the results can be replicated in larger studies though, it would certainly lay to rest one of the myths about vaccines and autism, namely the one that maintains that vaccines given at or around the age of 2 cause autism, i.e. it would exonerate the MMR vaccine for example. But that is not what I wish to deal with today. What I do wish to deal with today is the common anti-vaccine conundrum that “there isn’t a single study on the cumulative effects of vaccines on (fill in the blank)“. You will always hear this from the anti-vaccine crowd, especially when the topic of autism is being discussed. Superficially it seems to make sense, after all if we’re giving vaccines to children why shouldn’t we test if in the cumulative they cause autism?
The problem is, of course, that there are thousands of afflictions that one could choose to blame vaccines for, and then turn around and ask why a cumulative study of the effects of the vaccination schedule on that particular affliction has not been done. The list could include, but not be limited to:
- Nearsightedness
- Farsightedness
- Cancer (all types)
- Diabetes
- Bone breakage
- Deafness
- Blindness
- Heart problems
- Lung problems
- Kidney failure
- and on, and on, and on
I wish to be clear that I do not mean to make light of the seriousness of autism as a disorder. The point is that we could pick literally hundreds of things to blame on vaccines and demand cumulative studies to be done, and maintain the vaccines are to blame until said studies are done, effectively perpetually moving the goal post so that vaccines are never considered “good enough”. Even the most strident anti-vaccine activist has to concede that research money is limited and we cannot possibly run studies about everything, so a certain level of plausibility must be established before studies of this magnitude are to be undertaken.
Also, that is why when a new vaccine is introduced to the schedule, studies comparing children that received that vaccine, and children that did not are done, and analyses are performed to see if anything out of the ordinary develops in the vaccinated group. Instead of testing for every possible affliction one at a time, we compare the two groups to see if anything at all presents at statistically significant levels in the group receiving the vaccine. If a signal comes through, then it is warranted and justified to do studies specifically on that.
Yet the vaccine schedule is not the only thing that has changed since the 80s. It is not true that besides the number of vaccines, everything else has remained constant between then and now. If that were the case, at least I would say the anti-vaxers hypothesis is plausible. How many things have changed dramatically between then and today? And a follow up question then becomes: how many of those have been tested for their cumulative effect on autism rates?
Here I wish to start a list of the major differences between the life a child born in the 80s and now in the developed world, because any one of those, or any combination thereof, could in theory have affected autism rates and be responsible for the increased autism diagnoses.
Please feel free to add to the list in the comments section and I will keep updating the entry with your suggestions.
List of things that have changed since the 80s that could affect autism rates but most likely have not have been studied for their effects on autism (either on their own or in any combination)
- Internet
- High Speed Internet
- Podcasts
- MP3 players
- DVDs
- GPS
- Smartphones
- Tablets
- Flat Screen TVs
- Average # of toys children own
- Car Ownership
- Hybrid Cars
- Reality TV
- Game Consoles (Wii, SPS etc.)
- Bike helmet use
- Time spent outdoors
So if many things have changed between the 80s and now, along with the vaccination schedule, if we have studies suggestive that signs of autism are detectable as early as 6 months of age, thus implying they have been there earlier than that, then why do we single out vaccines as the culprit? How can one possibly, reasonably maintain that vaccines cause autism?
I am the parent of a vaccinated child who just recently caught Pertussis (whopping cough) from a non vaccinated child. He was extremely sick for a couple of weeks. Had to be taken to the ER because he couldnt stop coughing for 1 minute straight. His coughs were so forceful that he would turn red and look like he was going to die. He was on breathing treatments, steroids, several antibiotics before he was even tested for Whooping Cough because he had been vaccinated for it so his pediatrician didnt test for it immediately. It was 2.5 weeks stress and worry. He is finally much better but still has the lingering effects of the infections which could last for months. I suffer from an illness and am immuno suppressed so now I have to worry about getting this awful infection. To be honest, I never really gave a thought to non vaccinated children and their parents but now, after experiencing the effects of THEIR choices onto me and my own, to say I am mad is an understatement. I have had the health department contact my pediatrician to get all our information. They contacted my husband and I via the phone AND in person.They made sure that me and my husband are taking antibiotics and getting a booster shot. Made sure my little boy was taking the right treatment.Our case will not be closed until they are sure that we are not contagious or get the infection. While I think this is a great thing (keeping tabs on people who have infectious diseases) I am mad and confused as to why the people who do not vaccinate their children do not get this same treatment. Is the health department even aware of the people with non vaccinated children? Does the health department visit them and have open cases on them to make sure they arent spreading diseases? Im sure the answer is NO. The nurse from the health department (who was very nice) said that this is the USA and people have the right not to vaccinate their kids. Their hands are tied and they cant do anything about this problem. If this is the USA and people have the freedom not to vaccinate why dont I have the freedom to protect my child/self in school/public from being possibly exposed to deadly infections that can be prevented in most cases? This issue seems to me to be the same as smoking and how they have made it a LAW that people cannot smoke in most public places or certainly enclosed public places because the exposure can effect innocent people who do not smoke. I have no problem with people not vaccinating. Thats the risk that they take. I guess Im just confused as to why their choice can effect me and my loved ones lives… This is all new to me so I apologize for not knowing that much about this subject and if my views are way off base. My actual question is this…..Is there a way to find out if there are any (or how many) non vaccinated children attend a certain school? Our school has several signs stating that all children must be immunized in order to attend it. Because of those signs I thought I had no reason to worry about my little boy. I just found out that there is a loop hole and it is possible for children to attend school even if they arent vaccinated. Is there anything we can do to change this? Any info would be appreciated.
The answer to your questions would depend on exactly where you are as local laws differ widely (as would how you’d go about finding out how many disease spreaders there are).
As for getting the laws and policies changed, that’s probably going to be hard to do though the fact that the majority do vaccinate could help, it certainly does appear as if herd immunity where you are hasn’t been reached so putting it in those terms is probably the way to go.
Thanks for your response. I am in California. Do you know what the law is for this state by chance?
Melissa,
here’s a link to the CA state website where they list the 2010 immunization rates by school (I assume at some point it will be updated to the 2011 lists):
http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Pages/ImmunizationRatesatCaliforniaSchools.aspx
You can also find a lot more information about the laws here.
And yes, the Personal Beliefs Exemption provides a gigantic loophole out immunizations “required” for school.
Fantastic link Chemmomo; I wasn’t aware they published data in that detail. They even break it down by school name. This will really be helpful to Melissa. Thanks for taking the time to dig it up.
And yes, the Personal Beliefs Exemption is a disgrace; to give a misguided parent’s ego more importance than their children’s health is nonsense in my book.
Hi Melissa,
I am very sorry to hear about everything you went through. Would you like to write your story and have it posted here at The Vaccine Times?
Melissa,
As far as finding out about unvaccinated children at your kid’s school, the school itself is probably the best place to start. Yes, all children are required to be vaccinated, but there are many exemptions available. However, it is my understanding that the school does/should keep records of children who skipped shots and should have something in their files.
So far as sharing the information with you, that’s probably not possible/very limited. At most I would think they would give you overall school statistics about how many parents have filed exemption paperwork, but they would not be able to tell you any identifiable information I am afraid. It would be impossible I would think for you to even get a number of how many children in your son’s class are not up-to-date with their vaccines unfortunately.
Here is a map of part of California showing vaccination rates for various schools (may be the same data as given in the other link I just noticed above)
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immunization29-2009mar29-map,0,426776.htmlstory
You may also be interested in this story on “This American Life” about outbreaks traced unvaccinated clusters http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/370/ruining-it-for-the-rest-of-us
Melissa, maybe you should start by asking the question how in the world did your “protected”, “vaccinated” child catch the infectious disease they were supposedly protected from in the first place? If vaccines are the answer to protecting everyone from infectious diseases, then why are vaccinated children just as likely to catch infectious diseases as nonvaccinated children?
Why don’t you check out the facts regarding the current whooping cough outbreak in California specifically. For instance there is this article: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/09/vaccine-response-pertussis/
It states that the majority of the cases have been in VACCINATED children who are current with their boosters! Also, http://therefusers.com/refusers-newsroom/effectiveness-of-dtap-wanes-substantially-over-time/ shows how the pertussis bacteria remains in the vaccinated and can infect others. I would bet money it was some vaccinated child carrying around the bacteria that infected either your child directly or the unvaccinated child.
Pertussis vaccination coverage in America is about 90% and has been for years. It is simply ignorant to blame an unvaccinated child for a pertussis case. This link http://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/July-2010/Whooping-Cough-Outbreaks-Vaccine-Failures.aspx explains how there is another form of pertussis called parapertussis for which there is no vaccine. Did your doctor have your child’s pertussis tested to see which strain it was? I doubt it. it’s just easier to blame an unvaccinated child.
Pertussis cycles every 4-5 years despite vaccination rates. So again, it’s ignorance on your part to even suggest your child’s case was because of an unvaccinated child. Even if your child’s case came from an unvaccinated child, it is highly probable that the unvaccinated child was infected by a vaccinated child. There are simply no guarantees when it comes to Pertussis. It can affect both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.
Here are two other links showing the pertussis outbreak is actually worse among vaccinated than the unvaccinated.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/vaccination-is-steady-but-pertussis-is-surging/
http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/sdcounty/article_1e57b3db-8302-5313-99b3-f15d48b8829f.html
Vaccines are incredibly over hyped. Even if they were completely safe, there is still no real evidence they have ever had any role in eliminated disease.
In 1985 there was a measles outbreak in an elementary school in Corpus Christi, TX. Over 99% had been vaccinated and 95% were tested and shown to have immunity. It didn’t matter. Here’s a link. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3821823
There are many cases of outbreaks in almost 100% vaccinated populations.
Please look deeper into these issues before simply blaming the unvaccinated for your problems.
Vaccines aren’t 100% effective, thus some who have gotten the vaccine will get the disease anyway if it is spreading around the population. That’s why we need herd immunity and why we can’t afford to have clusters of unvaccinated people even if the population as a whole has vaccination levels high enough for herd immunity (since it would still be able to spread in those clusters).
I’m going to vote this for stupidest comment on this comment thread.
[quote]In 1985 there was a measles outbreak in an elementary school in Corpus Christi, TX. Over 99% had been vaccinated and 95% were tested and shown to have immunity. It didn’t matter. Here’s a link. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3821823 [/quote]
Did you even read the links that you posted? First of all, none of the 1732 students with antibodies contracted measles. Second, 4.1% of the vaccinated students that did contract measles falls within the published 95-98% effectiveness rates. Finally, the study found that the number of doses of vaccine received was the most important predictor of antibody response; meaning that following the recommended schedule yielded the best protection.
What you should take away from this study is not that the measles vaccine isn’t effective, but that measles is incredibly contagious.
You completely neglect to consider the change in food production and ingredients including preservatives that are used now compared to the 1980s. Also, during the 1980s children didn’t receive even 1/3 of the vaccines that they now receive. Leukemia rates are on an increase of 1% per year due to environmental factors. In my research there is no study on vaccinations conducted that consider heritage, diet, or how one vaccine is impacted by others as well as the affects of prescription drugs and vaccinations. The assumption that is used in lab studies is that the biology of lab animals is a proper representation of human biology despite the fact that the lab animals are fed a very different diet, have not had the same environmental exposures, nor have they been exposed to medication and drug combinations that a human child experiences. The fact that there has never been a controlled study group of unvaccinated individuals to use as a base in research is disturbing and should have been a responsibility of the researchers as a necessary component of any research. The US Governments establishment of a vaccine court and hundreds of millions paid in settlements by the government to families who were able to sustain the very grueling process of proving a linkage between their child’s disability and the administration of a vaccine in and of itself proves merit to the claim that vaccines have caused disabilities. In working with a large group of physically and mentally disabled children and in hearing the parents explanations as well as medical records, it is a very strong trend, especially with our autistic clients. Several of our clients experienced immediate paralysis and heart conditions (within 24 hours) of having received routine scheduled vaccinations. I have personal experience with two cases of guillian berre syndrom resulting from flu shots paired with an exposure to staph infections. I do know some mothers who chose not to vaccinate and observed their children display above average maturity and enormous success in their educations. I am interested in learning if their are spikes in behavioral disorder diagnosis amongst school age children proportionate to vaccination schedules. It is very difficult to obtain quality in OAS research results on this fascinating subject.
Another point I wish to make is why is more effort placed on vaccinating children who are unaffected by diseases based on the rare chance of exposure. Wouldn’t it be more affective to put an equal or greater effort into discovery of treatment of the actual disease. Based on this theory the mass population would not be subjected to exposure of a vaccine, or a vaccine’s possible negative affects. Based on our medical advancements, it would seem we could develop very efficient treatment for the small handful of individuals who are actually exposed to a disease.
The reason there is a rare chance of exposure is due to the high levels of vaccination. Before 1963 just about every kid had measles before the age of fifteen.
There are several problems with your suggestion to treat instead of prevent:
1. It is much more expensive to treat a disease than to prevent it. Antibiotics can only prevent pertussis, diphtheria and tetanus from continuing to create the toxins that cause serious harm. The best one can do is prevent further harm, and to keep the person alive with respiratory support. That is because they all tend to choke the person to death.
2. For bacterial infections you run the risk of creating more bacterial resistance, and then you would have super-pertussis.
3. Antiviral medications are very expensive and have several side effects.
There have been advancements in medicine: they are called vaccines that actually prevent the diseases.
In reading further on the pertusis vaccine, the statistics clearly show the vaccine is useless and that the majority of cases are amongst vaccinated children. This vaccine is only affective for about 3-7 years which means almost all adults are unvaccinated and completely capable of transmitting the disease. In light of this fact, to lay blame on one unvaccinated child at the same school is simply a unfounded witch hunt. It is most likely a child’s own parent unknowingly transmitting the virus. If you review the charts from the CDC, you will find the population of people who did not receive whopping cough vaccines are actually the least likely to be diagnosed. On a side note… In reading tonight I learned that researchers are currently testing a new vaccine for depression and behavioral disorders. In my work I can confidently state that the parent population of disabled children I work with would have much preferred their child to have sustained a whopping cough virus, than be faced have their child faced with a lifelong disability that has caused them to never experience a normal life. what is good for the goose is NOT always good for the gander.
“In reading further on the pertusis vaccine, the statistics clearly show the vaccine is useless and that the majority of cases are amongst vaccinated children.”
I’d like to see these statistics. It’s easy to be misled by the fact that most children are vaccinated, so a small percentage of vaccine failure among the large portion of vaccinated children can outnumber the large percentage of disease occurrence among the small portion of unvaccinated children.
“. In my work I can confidently state that the parent population of disabled children I work with would have much preferred their child to have sustained a whopping cough virus, than be faced have their child faced with a lifelong disability that has caused them to never experience a normal life. ”
I prefer my living child over a dead one. Go figure.
Carolyn S:
And even if you get the disease you only have immunity for about four years despite feeling like you are coughing up a lung for three months, its nickname is the 100 day cough. Also diphtheria’s nickname is “choking angel”, and actually getting it and surviving provides very little immunity (the same goes for tetanus). So you need to provide some very good evidence that the DTaP and Tdap are more more dangerous than those diseases. It is not reasonable to expect a vaccine to provide better immunity than the actual disease:
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2005 May;24(5 Suppl):S58-61.
Duration of immunity against pertussis after natural infection or vaccination.
There is a reason that the Tdap is now recommended for everyone over the age of eleven.
In each of the three comments you post here today there are several serious erros. Especially this:
Pertussis (whooping cough) is not a virus, it is a bacterial infection. It is extremely difficult to treat, and can cause permanent disability.
Before you try to educate us, please learn some of the basics. That includes the differences between bacterial and viral diseases, what it takes to treat them, the costs associated with treating, the risks of disability and death of each disease and the real risks of the vaccines. Then when you do make statements, be sure to provide verifiable scientific documentation to support your claims. They must include the title, journal and date of the PubMed index papers. You can also link to the “charts from the CDC” you mentioned.
Please see these examples:
Impact of anti-vaccine movements on pertussis control: the untold story
Pediatrics. 2009 Jun;123(6):1446-51.
Parental refusal of pertussis vaccination is associated with an increased risk of pertussis infection in children.
Am J Epidemiol. 2008 Dec 15;168(12):1389-96. Epub 2008 Oct 15.
Geographic clustering of nonmedical exemptions to school immunization requirements and associations with geographic clustering of pertussis.
JAMA. 2000 Dec 27;284(24):3145-50.
Individual and community risks of measles and pertussis associated with personal exemptions to immunization.
Vaccine. 2011 Nov 12. [Epub ahead of print]
Lack of association between childhood immunizations and encephalitis in California, 1998-2008
Pediatrics. 2010 Oct;126(4):656-64. Epub 2010 Sep 13.
Prenatal and infant exposure to thimerosal from vaccines and immunoglobulins and risk of autism
Pediatrics. 2010 Aug;126(2):263-9. Epub 2010 Jul 19.
Lack of association between acellular pertussis vaccine and seizures in early childhood.
Pediatrics. 2010 Jun;125(6):1134-41. Epub 2010 May 24.
On-time vaccine receipt in the first year does not adversely affect neuropsychological outcomes.
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2010 May;29(5):397-400.
Lack of association between measles-mumps-rubella vaccination and autism in children: a case-control study.
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2006 Sep;25(9):768-73.
Encephalopathy after whole-cell pertussis or measles vaccination: lack of evidence for a causal association in a retrospective case-control study.
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2005;159:1136-1144.
Economic Evaluation of the 7-Vaccine Routine Childhood Immunization Schedule in the United States, 2001