To wonder why the f* people still think vaccines cause autism?

[coolitcathy]

Name changed for privacy reasons.

Stumbled across a Facebook group about "parents against vaccines" a few minutes ago which suggested, nay STATED, that vaccines cause autism and are essentially poison. I think the hysteria is potentially getting worse due to this Covid vaccination that's getting rolled out at the mo. Is anyone still infuriated or is the anger dying down now as we all get distracted by something else happening? Also why is autism seen as such a bad thing?

(If you're anti vax I'm open to you sharing your viewpoints but I haven't seen any information that makes me consider that outlook)

I Totally disagree @Ltdannygreen I have never seen any type of low functioning autism portrayed in the media or on TV ,I have however seen lots of people who are very vocal and clearly articulate talking about their autism,this isn't a bad thing of course but IME the general public have a very one dimensional view about autism ,which does little for people to understand my son's very complex needs and other children similar to him

DD1 is autistic (as is most of our family) and v scathing to antivaxxers. Her stock reply to them is “Yeah, OK, vaccines caused my autism. Can’t think what caused it in my parents, grandparents, uncle, aunts, great aunt and cousins though!”
There is no evidence at all for vaccines as a cause, and at least four genes that have been implicated. Strong family histories like ours are pretty compelling.

@Kaliorphic

, if autistics were the majority things would be designed in a way to play to our strengths the same way things do for neurortypicals.

Yes but it still wouldn't be would it, as the needs of different people are wildly different. The world that fits you doesn't fit everyone with autism. And the world that fits some people with autism wouldn't fit you. Just like NT people. We're not all the same. And my children struggle to fit with school too for different reasons. 🤷‍♀️

No it wouldn't be perfect for everyone, but there are a few general things, like no blaring loud music in shops, smaller class sizes, sensory rooms at school, to name a handful off the top of my head, that most autistic and other neurodiverse people agree on and would vastly improve things for us

I don't have extreme issues with sensory problems (other than food) but I was thinking the other day about how much nicer things would be if I could choose to read subtitles when people were speaking rather than having to listen all the time. No blaring loud music and individual attention would be great, but is especially difficult to access if you appear "high functioning" I think unfortunately (though I wish it were easier to apply to society)

No it wouldn't be perfect for everyone, but there are a few general things, like no blaring loud music in shops, smaller class sizes, sensory rooms at school, to name a handful off the top of my head, that most autistic and other neurodiverse people agree on and would vastly improve things for us

Smaller classrooms would be fab. That would be helpful for many many kids no doubt. But unlikely to happen. Too expensive. Sadly.

There are lots of reasons why people believe this bullshit. Amongst them are:

a) a huge amount of sneering anti-intellectualism in our society.
b) a scientifically illiterate media that can't properly factcheck health and science stories.
c) the rise of individualism/populism making people believe that their ignorance has the same value as others' expertise because they have the vote and pay taxes.
d) social media.

My kids both had mmr so dont label me anti vaxxer (so disrespectful) but at the same time that anybody who asks a question is mocked and shamed in to silence, we are also being told that autism is epigenetic and that we do not know what turns on the autism genes yet. I looked in to single vaccinations. It just underlined to me how there was no risk free option. I went with mmr 3in1 in the end.

I disagree with op's assertion thst autism forms in the womb. The autism genes might be switched on or off in different environments.

OP, for a variety of reasons I imagine. None of which are based in rational thinking.

On your autism point however, can I suggest you take a look at the decrease in babies with Down Syndrome, and other non NT babies, being born?
With the new and very effective natal tests available now it would appear that a lot of couples/pregnant women are deciding not to carry babies likely to have chromosomal disorders to term. As is their right.
I think it is interesting that this is, and has been, happening and that there is a focus on vaccinations "turning" the recipient into an autistic person.
It is almost as if those that are not NT are lesser and someone must be to blame.

I disagree with op's assertion thst autism forms in the womb. The autism genes might be switched on or off in different environments.

I based that assertion on these:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-26750786 ("Autism begins long before birth" BBC article by Helen Briggs)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30485722/ ("Autism is a prenatal disorder: Evidence from late gestation brain overgrowth" Pubmed article)

www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-and-child/brain-study-suggests-autism-starts-in-the-womb/ ("Brain study suggests autism starts in the womb"

etc. Now if any of these are wrong let me know, but these are more-or-less trusted sources in my book, which is why I stated that about autism.

I think people just have a terrible assessment of risks and it’s been too long in the western world since people really were faced with the reality of serious infectious disease. Hopefully Covid may have made people realise a bit more why vaccines matter - but imagine if Covid was killing lots of small children or young adults rather than very elderly people. That’s what these diseases used to be like, but people have forgotten. And so they’d rather focus on the infinitesimal risk of vaccine injury or the non existent risk of autism as they aren’t able to perceive the much higher risk from the diseases. That’s because basically they’re relying on everyone around them to be good and get the vaccine which is why they’ll be ok anyway. I’d be fully supportive if the UK went down the route of Italy and I think Australia and made childhood vaccinations practically mandatory through requiring them for school and medical registration.

I think people want something to blame because they are genuinely grieving. I also think they believe because so many others are vaccinated the risk is low for something to happen to their child so I don't believe they would rather have a dead child than an autistic one. That said if there was a pre-natal test available for autism I am sure many would not continue with the pregnancy it would probably be a very similar situation to Down's syndrome

I also blame the BBC. When Wakefield was peddling his ideas, and hoping to make a lot of money from his own single vaccines, the BBC were giving him a lot of airtime. If vaccines were on the news he, or someone with the same views, were there to give an alternative view point. This made it appear as though the scientific community were pretty much equally split
Of course we know now that wasn't the case.

That said if there was a pre-natal test available for autism I am sure many would not continue with the pregnancy it would probably be a very similar situation to Down's syndrome

I have very mixed feelings on that if I'm honest. I support abortion and individual reproductive rights, but to a certain extent I'd be sad if autistic people were not brought into the world for the benefit of neurotypical people. Maybe that makes me selfish, I'm not sure. (I won't speak on Down's syndrome as I don't have enough information or experience of the condition)

Would people really rather have a dead child than an autistic one 😱
In some ways he’s I can see rarely that vaccines can cause serious reactions but that is so so rare. It’s risk vs benefit and the benefited far outweigh any risks

I disagree with op's assertion thst autism forms in the womb. The autism genes might be switched on or off in different environments

Autism is a neurodevelopmental condition, there are marked differences in brain development and structure when compared to NT people. Those sorts of changes do not come out the end of a syringe.

@coolitcathy agree. The risk of not having autistic people is that some of the major developments in technology, surgery, science etc wouldn't exist because it's those people that are actually making the difference in society. I guess the issue is that at the other end of the spectrum it changes your life completely if your child is low functioning

to a certain extent I'd be sad if autistic people were not brought into the world for the benefit of neurotypical people

Whilst it might be sad, it's down to the choice of the person who is giving birth / will be the caregiver. Who may or may not be NT.

Whilst it might be sad, it's down to the choice of the person who is giving birth / will be the caregiver. Who may or may not be NT.

I agree. And I would never want to subject an autistic child to a parent who didn't want them or was struggling to cope (in the same way I would never want to subject a woman to raising a baby she was not able to raise for whatever reason, autism included). But I would still be upset at the eradication of one of the only categories of people who understands some of my behaviours.

Also not sure if this is useful for anyone but I'm skimming through some autism resources right now and found this quite interesting.

But I would still be upset at the eradication of one of the only categories of people who understands some of my behaviours

That's fair enough.

I flat out disagree with aborting people on grounds of autism, might as well abort for green eyes or red hair or anything else you personally find unfavourable. I support abortion rights but I've always found aborting for disability, when non life threatening, to be very sinister. If you can't accept a "disabled" child then you have no business having any child in my opinion. I'm aware that that is a strong view though and that some will disagree.

@coolitcathy

Also not sure if this is useful for anyone but I'm skimming through some autism resources right now and found this quite interesting.

This is a great resource, thanks!

If you can't accept a "disabled" child then you have no business having any child in my opinion. I'm aware that that is a strong view though and that some will disagree.

I disagree. Because I don't think you or anyone else have the right to decide for other people what they should or should not do.

I flat out disagree with aborting people on grounds of autism, might as well abort for green eyes or red hair or anything else you personally find unfavourable.
I would never personally abort for reasons of disability (unless there was a serious malformation that would drastically affect quality of life and cause suffering or death). But I also wouldn't want to put disabled people into homes where they could not be cared for or supported.

Maybe that's one of the downsides of these developments of science, the ability to play God brings up a whole load of ethical questions and makes me worry about the future of autistic people.

I disagree. Because I don't think you or anyone else have the right to decide for other people what they should or should not do.

Do you think this scientific development is beneficial @Kaliorphic? Because (of course) for a long time there wasn't the capacity to tell people what they "should or should not do". I'm worried that the potential abortion of autistic fetuses would play into the anti-vax narrative and further enforce the ideology that autistic people need to be removed or eradicated in someway. It's quite disturbing if I'm honest, but I also support the idea that people shouldn't have children they are unwilling or unable to support. It's tricky.