Help me make sense of MMR - hype or theory

[felicity10]

OK, so I've been through a few pages of previous posts, I must be missing something because I can't make sense of it!

DD is 1 and I've had a letter about the vacs from the GP. I've heard about the MMR in the news few years ago and about the link to autism, but I just would really value your views.

Single vacs with no mumps or the MMR? Can anyone point me in the direction of key MMR issues?

I just don't want to get to the gp's and then feel like I am getting bullied into having the mmr - it is normally very no nonsense nurses who barely speak english, so will be unlikely to give me a clear answer as to any risks.

I am amazed that we have this lack of clarity in the UK.

Many thanks in advance!

You talk about semantics! You know exactly what I mean. I've never denied the very rare, as you admit, vaccine damage. That's not what we're taking about and you know it.

No, RPO, not experts who agree with me. I'm talking about bodies such as the Academy of American Pediatricians or the Royal College of Psychiatrists or the WHO. But I know that expertise is a source of ridicule for you, so that's fine.

I haven't had a chance to read through the papers that you link to RPO, but I'm sure you have, so you can tell me which ones mention measles, because I don't see it in any of titles.

Most of the titles simply seem to describe enterocolitis in some people who have ASD with no mention whatsoever of any link to measles or vaccines. If so, what was the point in bringing them to this thread, except perhaps for a disingenious attempt to make it look like Wakefields work has credibility without specifying that its nothing to do with the debate in hand.

Beachcomber, I'll answer your questions in another thread but please note that I believe all of these queries have been raised and dealt with already further up this thread.

*The following peer-reviewed papers support Dr. Wakefield's original findings:

Furlano R, Anthony A, Day R, Brown A, Mc Garvey L, Thomson M, et al. "Colonic CD8 and T cell filtration with epithelial damage in children with autism." J Pediatr 2001;138:366-72.

Sabra S, Bellanti JA, Colon AR. "Ileal lymphoid hyperplasia, non-specific colitis and pervasive developmental disorder in children". The Lancet 1998;352:234-5.

Torrente F., Machado N., Perez-Machado M., Furlano R., Thomson M., Davies S., Wakefield AJ, Walker-Smith JA, Murch SH. "Enteropathy with T cell infiltration and epithelial IgG deposition in autism." Molecular Psychiatry. 2002;7:375-382.

Wakefield AJ, Anthony A, Murch SH, Thomson M, Montgomery SM, Davies S, Walker-Smith JA. "Enterocolitis in children with developmental disorder." American Journal of Gastroenterology 2000;95:2285-2295.

Ashwood P, Anthony A, Pellicer AA, Torrente F, Wakefield AJ. "Intestinal lymphocyte populations in children with regressive autism: evidence for extensive mucosal immunopathology." Journal of Clinical Immunology, 2003;23:504-517.

The following peer-reviewed papers replicate Dr. Wakefield's original findings:

Gonzalez, L. et al., "Endoscopic and Histological Characteristics of the Digestive Mucosa in Autistic Children with gastro-Intestinal Symptoms". Arch Venez Pueric Pediatr, 2005;69:19-25.

Balzola, F., et al., "Panenteric IBD-like disease in a patient with regressive autism shown for the first time by wireless capsule enteroscopy: Another piece in the jig-saw of the gut-brain syndrome?" American Journal of Gastroenterology, 2005. 100(4): p. 979- 981.

Balzola F et al . "Autistic enterocolitis: confirmation of a new inflammatory bowel disease in an Italian cohort of patients." Gastroenterology 2005;128(Suppl. 2);A-303.

These are the articles on treatment of gastrointestinal symptoms in autistic children:

Buie T, et al. Pediatrics. 2010 Jan;125 Suppl 1:S19-29. Recommendations for evaluation and treatment of common gastrointestinal problems in children with ASDs.

Buie T, et al. Pediatrics. 2010 Jan;125 Suppl 1:S1-18. Evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of gastrointestinal disorders in individuals with ASDs: a consensus report.*

Starlight what a stupid bloody thing to say.

Stick to the debate.

(But, do remind me when was the last time ASD was considered a fatal disease, unlike measles.

By your own argument though perhaps you should ask on of the 18 grieving mothers who have lost children to measles in the last hour if they would swap their dead child for one with ASD?

It should start with safety and saving lives and you can only determine that by analysing the data statistically, and the statistics say the vaccine is safer than the alternative.

It's an emotional question but a pertinent one. It's pertinent because of your absolutist stance. You have determined to bring this debate away from moderation, cogency and rationality; and to take it to scaremongering, misleading, absolutism, ridicule, the creation of straw men and so on.

This is the only question I've seen from our side which is "your" kind of question. As Starlight says -- regardless of how uncomfortable it makes you feel, you ought to give it thought. You are asking people whose children have high risk factors, as accepted by clinicians though not by the wider "scientific community", to risk their lives.

It is a hard question to answer. For you.

"You can only determine that by analysing the data statistically, and the statistics say the vaccine is safer than the alternative."

I'm afraid you cannot diagnose a disorder in a child by looking at epidemiology tables. Twas ever thus and twill ever be. You need to look at the child.

This is the very basic mistake you and stata make.

Sausage, you are veering dangerously close to the extremely facile and offensive: "better autistic than dead".

Your emotional use of measles statistics, which must relate to developing countries I assume?, will have more to do with environmental conditions than vaccination. I'm sure of it. I haven't got a bit of paper to say this: I was told it by an senior industry scientist during a conversation on vaccination during which he roundly disagreed with all my views, except this. He's definitely onside with you. But he acknowledges that 70 pc of the problem is not a product, but clean water. I think you know this, but you want to mislead people as Stata did. I'm sure of that too.

Gawd Leonie. Yes you're right.

Thinking about it though, if Sausage really is saying that awful thing, at least she has accepted a role of the vaccine in triggering autistic disorder.

That's quite funny that 3 out of the 5 peer-reviewed papers that support Dr. Wakefield's original findings are by Wakefield/Walker-Smith.

"peer-reviewed" -- isn't that the mothership in your world?

If you have concerns, then those concerns should be raised with your doctor. If you feel your GP doesn't know, then go to a specialist. I would never presume to make a clinical decision for anyone. The doctor can then make a decision based on the weight of evidence and clinical indications. If you have an egg allergy, for example, you should certainly speak to your doctor before you have any vaccine. Goes without syaing really. Unless the doctor's MBBS is from the internet for example.

If you wish to see what the experts say about the issues at hand, go to sites which represent those experts. If you want paediatricians, go to the American Academy of Pediatrices or Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia. If you want the overall picture, try the WHO. Look at NICE or the NHS for UK perspective. Go to academic websites of established universities.

And if you want to see the original research, search in google scholar or pubmed. No need to cherry pick on either side. You can just work your way down the list. Give me any combination of words to search in searches of databases of journals and let's see what comes up and what the overwhelming evidence says. Let's work our way slowly through the list. I think it'll be an instructive exercise albeit rather time consuming.

But if you don't believe in scientific evidence, be open about it like Leonie at least. The reason I like her is she doesn't pretend not to be anti-vax and she's honest about what she really thinks - that intuition is an equal and valid source of evidence. Funny how my intuition tells me that when I get better I should stop taking medicine. Good thing I don't listen to that intuition if I ever need antibiotics, huh!But if intuition trumps science...

And Leonie's honest about gems like the unimmunised immune system being some how more robust than the immunised one which is really out there in fantasy land (along with organically fed children having a better immune system). Great stuff! Please do stick around, Leonie.

The problem with this 'go and research' when you have all these anti-vax nutter sites on the internet is that it will result in many many false positives, even if your concerns are valid (and I haven't been convinced that they are in their entirety, sometimes it's possible to discuss those concerns with the more rational fringe until things descend into pseudoscience, mumbo jumbo and conspiracy again). That is people who choose not to vaccinate when, in actual fact, they are perfectly fine to do so. Are you going to take responsibility for all those people? If you wish to bring it down to the personal level, will you stake your own child on this 'go and research' statement if it results in a child who wasn't vaccinated because of it ending up being brain damaged or dead from measles?

Peer review is far from perfect RPO. For one thing, it's based on trust. That's why when someone has been shown to have violated that trust, anything else they've done is treated with extreme caution.

I also think you need to get past this offensive business. It's not offensive other than in paranoia land to ask about disability vs death. We do it all the time. There is an indicator called Disability Adjusted Life Years for example where we take into account not only length of life but also quality of life. Do you find that offensive? If you find offence at the smallest thing, stay on the boards where everyone will just nod and agree with you. Don't try to bully people with cries of 'offence'. It's quite pathetic.

And on that topic. I was just thinking back to when my daughter was sick last year. She had to have a blood test. It was painful even with the anaesthetic cream. She was crying and screamed the place down. I was in a hospital in Africa a few months ago and I was talking to a paediatrician there about a trial we were involved in. One of the problems was that there was a stock out of the anaesthetic cream. The children in the trial were getting very upset because the blood tests were so painful for them. The idea that you'd do that to children at a birthday party without any clinical need? And you NEED ethical clearance before you even LOOK at a child for research. Anything to do with human subjects needs clearance, but especially vulnerable populations like children. And that's a joke?? Ha, ha, ha, something to laugh about? Now, that is really offensive. Callous disregard indeed. But you don't see it, do you? Extreme sensitivity to self is order of the day.

My ds doesn't have the anasthetic cream because the texture and having a plaster on upsets him. He does however sit quite happily to have the blood test done as long as he gets a cuddle from mum. If people are in agony from a blood test that says to me that the person taking the blood is inexperienced or just plain incompetent. I have very small veins and it is hard to take blood from me so I've found out over the years what a difference it makes when you have an expert doing the job.

I think it's a bit much to say that every child who has a blood test is going to be traumatised and screaming in agony. FWIW the only needle that caused ds pain and upset was when he had his mumps jab!

RPO. Just for the record. Of course sausage was referring to global statistics. I think everyone realised that. Why shouldn't she use genuine stats which happen to be genuinely dramatic?

What is true is that deaths from measles have declined independent of vaccines. I don't believe anyone has said otherwise. And children in developing countries are, unfortunately, less well nourished and more likely to suffer from co-morbidities so more likely to develop complications and to die from them. They are also less to be able to access medical care.

What's clean water got to do with it? You are aware that measles isn't spread in the water surely? Maybe it'd reduce some of the co-infections/morbidities - but 70%? No way. He must have been referring to vaccines. That's what'll reduce measles quickly and effectively in the developing world. I don't think you'll find one country in the world that has rejected a vaccine programme.

Glad to hear your experience was so positive Pixel. I'm sure it's not every child. All I know is what my child went through. And also what I was told by a pediatrician in our trial (not vaccine related btw). But if you think it's an appropriate thing to do at a birthday party adn without ethical clearance, then that's your opinion.

Wouldn't call it positive exactly, he was having blood tests to investigate his bowel condition...

I would think for a child who is already feeling sick and is in a scary environment (hospital eg) then a blood test could be the last straw and (understandably) cause a hysterical reaction.

That was all I meant.

I must be confusing you with someone else with fantastic intuition Leonie.