Can I ask the people who are anti-vac, how do you feel about the smallpox vaccine, do you think that was right? Would you have had it?

[Kendodd]

I suppose the same (ish) question could apply to the polio vaccine, I believe there is an eradication programme for that. Hopefully it'll be successful.

I don't think you are attacking and I'm not attacking you.

I just think you are wrong and I'm asking "Do you think you know better than those children's own doctors?" to help you realise that you are wrong. Because your answer will surely be "No".

What have I said that you think is wrong?

Am I not being clear?

Again:

You said: "I am aware that there are posters on here who feel that their children were damaged by vaccines." which sounds like you think their doctors who have diagnosed those children as vaccine-damaged are wrong.

Then you confirmed this by saying: "Anyone who believes that their child is on the autism spectrum because of vaccines is wrong."

You are wrong re the above two claims. There are MNers on here whose brain-damaged and severely autistic children have been diagnosed by their doctors as "vaccine-damaged".

Additionally: Are you aware that compensation is given out for something called "vaccine damage"? £120,000 one-off payment from the UK government. If there was no such thing as vaccine damage, why do you think there would be such a compensation scheme?

"There is no way of knowing who around you in vaccinated/still immune. Those vaccinated people around you may no longer have immunity."

Indeed. But I tend to know that hardly anyone ever seems to get measles or rubella, whilst loads of people catch colds. I therefore, in my mental risk assessment, consign the chance of catching measles as 'very low' and while I know the chances of catching a cold in any one year are very high, the impact is nevertheless low.

I don't need to know who in my immediate circle of contacts is vaccinated or not - just that within society at large the incidence of infectious measles is low.

And I am someone who does know a child who was vaccine damaged - or at least I agree with the parent that the child was vaccine damaged. I have seen the videos of a talking, communicating, happy sociable pre-jab toddler, and I know the non-verbal non-social learning disabled teen. That is a child who met some of the factors that would make me think twice about vaccinating if my own child fitted the criteria.

One of the scandals of the AW fiasco was that it was incredibly badly reported and the more nuanced material that could have been followed up was swamped in a general MMR scare - that was NEVER what AW's theory supported.

I have never said that there is no such thing as vaccine damage, and I am aware of the vaccine damage compensation scheme. A relation by marriage was compensated for damage which may have been caused by the pertussis vaccine 40 years ago.

However, if a doctor has told anyone that their child's autism was caused by vaccines then that doctor must not have read any of the scientific papers published since Wakefield.

Hi Martorana,
I wrote the bit below in a discussion about the lies told to parents by the anti-vaccine lobby over at Violent Metaphors. I thought it might strike a chord with you:

"And of course there is that very important lie that the anti-vaccine lobby also tell parents of autistic children; they'll tell them that people who say there is no causative link between vaccination and ASD are calling them (the parents) liars. That we are all saying they haven't seen their own child regress. That we are denying their suffering, and that we are utterly lacking in empathy. That we mock their pain.
We don't. Some of us (I don't, but I have friends who do and there are contributors in these comments too) have autistic children ourselves. Do we think vaccinations caused this? No. Because, possibly contrary to our own experience, the actual evidence leading to the overwhelming scientific consensus says that there is no causative link. The results of science are sometimes counterintuitive. Sometimes one thing follows hard on another's heels not because of it, but for other reasons. Reasons which aren't always clear. One of the reasons we have developed the scientific method is because we humans love a good story, and sometimes we can be led astray by this desire to see patterns where they simply don't exist. As Richard Feynman said: "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool."
Literally hundreds of thousands of research hours have been spent trying to find any possible causative link between vaccination and ASD. There isn't one. The researchers who are reaching these conclusions are not doing so because they hate the parents of ASD children. They are not saying this because they wish to laugh at children with complex neurodevelopmental disorders. These are people who have committed their lives to trying to understand, to unravel the complex mesh of cause and effect that surrounds ASD. They're scientists and, unlike many of the proponents of the vaccination ASD myth, many of them aren't particularly media savvy or charismatic. But they work very hard and with great dedication, and the conclusion of their work, the consensus, is that vaccination is not causally linked to ASD.
The scientific community is not accusing parents of children with ASD who believe it was caused by vaccines liars. They go to great pains to understand why this belief exists and is so prevalent. They also try time and time again to understand how to get their message across, whilstshowing utmost respect for the parents involved. They, we, know it's a message which will be met with resistance, and often the message is complex and not easy to put in a soundbite. The anti-vaccine lobby have it easy, they have a message that parents want to hear, and are not hamstrung by things like the need to tell the truth."

Cheers,
Rosewind

Are you under the impression that the Wakefield saga was about no vaccine ever causing regression & eventual diagnosis with autism?

There is quite a bit of research that suggests children with mitochondrial disease and immune system problems can be susceptible to such damage. Two children have been awarded millions of dollars in the US due to 'vaccine-caused encephalopathy leading to a diagnosis of ASD'.

There are viral diseases that are known to trigger autism, like herpes encephalitis. Is it that incredible that vaccines may cause ASD if viral infections do? Vaccinating baby boys against Hep B was shown to increase their risk of autism by 3x. Hep B vaccine is also linked to a significantly higher risk of demyelination in later life and Multiple Sclerosis, an immune system condition.

The subject is a little more complicated than "Andrew Wakefield was a con artist and so we now know no vaccines have ever caused autism and they never will".

Cotes,
"Two children have been awarded millions of dollars in the US due to 'vaccine-caused encephalopathy leading to a diagnosis of ASD'."
Which cases would these be? Because if you're thinking of Ryan Mojabi then I think you'll find he doesn't have ASD:
"The child did not have any ASD behaviours from two CHAT screenings:
On May 10, 2004, at Ryans sixteen month well-child visit, Dr. Armstrong completed a Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (CHAT) screen. Ps Ex. 4 At 25. That CHAT screen indicated that Ryan was interested in other children, pretend play, peek-a-boo, points with index finger, makes eye contact, and brings object for show. Id. On January 25, 2005, Dr. Armstrong examined Ryan for his twenty-four month well-baby check. Ps Ex. 4 at 31. During the visit, Dr. Armstrong conducted another CHAT screen, and again Ryan postively performed each of the listed behaviors.
Although, again the child exhibited neurological deficits affecting language and behaviour:
A month later, on October 27, 2005, Ryan was examined by the intake team at the Early Start Program. Id. at 55. The notes from this assessment reflect that Ryans parents are concerned that Ryans development of speech and language appears to be delayed. Id. The notes go on to state that [Ryan] does not say very many words. Father relates that Ryan seems to have about 10 words that he will sometimes use. [Ryan] no longer uses words that he has previously learned. He is shy with other children and he is not able to adapt to new situations easily. He does not like to have other people come over to visit. Id. On November 7, 2005, Dr. Armstrong examined Ryan again and observed that Ryan had some aggressive interactions with vocalizations and hitting outbursts. Ps Ex. 4 at 57."
From this blog, but it's been covered extensively elsewhere (mainly because the anti-vaccination lobby kept making claims like yours above):
justthevax.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/mmr-encephalitis-nvicp-decision.html
Then the other child usually mentioned along with Ryan Mojabi is Emily Lowrie. Both cases are covered well by Orac, here:
scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/01/15/david-kirbys-back-and-this-time-his-anti-vaccine-fear-mongering-induces-ennui/
I understand that Emily has a diagnosis of Pervasive Developmental Disorder?
The thing is that no-one with any shred of sense or any credibility will ever deny that vaccine damage occurs. What we can say, however, is that it happens very, very rarely. In the UK for example here are the figures from 1999-October 2012 when this Freedom of Information request was made:
www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223234/foi_3426_2012.pdf
This covers all vaccinations, including diphtheria, whooping cough, MMR, polio, tetanus etc.
The number of successful claims for this period of rather over a decade amount to 38 in total.
So yes, some people are damaged (and this is tragic) but many, many more tragic outcomes are prevented.
Vaccine damage happens, yes. But the damage caused by the diseases we vaccinate against are why we developed vaccines in the first place. These illnesses can disable and kill.
Cheers,
Rosewind

Hmmm. Is someone trying to promote their website?

And Orac covered the cases of Ryan and Emily again, here:
scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/08/14/an-zombie-antivaccine-meme-rises-from-the-grave-again/
Cheers,
Rosewind

Cotes,
'The subject is a little more complicated than "Andrew Wakefield was a con artist and so we now know no vaccines have ever caused autism and they never will".'
Well, yes. There's loads and loads of research which has been done which shows there is no link between MMR and ASD:

adc.bmj.com/content/93/10/832.short
"Results: No difference was found between cases and controls for measles antibody response. There was no doseresponse relationship between autism symptoms and antibody concentrations. Measles virus nucleic acid was amplified by reverse transcriptase-PCR in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from one patient with autism and two typically developing children. There was no evidence of a differential response to measles virus or the measles component of the MMR in children with ASD, with or without regression, and controls who had either one or two doses of MMR. Only one child from the control group had clinical symptoms of possible enterocolitis."

www.pediatricsdigest.mobi/content/118/4/1664.short
"INTERPRETATION. There is no evidence of measles virus persistence in the peripheral blood mononuclear cells of children with autism spectrum disorder."

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmv.20585/abstract
"This study failed to substantiate reports of the persistence of measles virus in autistic children with development regression. ."

www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0003140
"This study provides strong evidence against association of autism with persistent MV RNA in the GI tract or MMR exposure."

informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13550280701278462
"No significant differences in antibody titers to measles, mumps, and rubella viruses and diphtheria toxoid were found among the four groups. Additionally, there were no significant differences between the four groups for total immunoglobulin (Ig)G or IgM"

That's just the first few papers, there are more. Scientists have attempted to replicate Wakefield's findings, and they haven't been able to. And yes, Wakefield was a fraud, his study itself was fraudulent, as is described in the BMJ:
'In an editorial, Dr Godlee, together with deputy BMJ editor Jane Smith, and leading paediatrician and associate BMJ editor Harvey Marcovitch, conclude that there is no doubt that it was Wakefield who perpetrated this fraud. They say: A great deal of thought and effort must have gone into drafting the paper to achieve the results he wanted: the discrepancies all led in one direction; misreporting was gross.
There is no link between the MMR and ASD. Studies have looked for the link and not found it.
Cheers,
Rosewind.

Even if she is, she's at least promoting facts........

We have to make allowances for people who think Wakefield is a saint and the rest of the world is out of step.

Rosewind - I'm not interested in talking to strange people who prowl the net for MMR-related discussions and only appear on MN for MMR threads. Strange people so unfamiliar with MN that they end posts with "Cheers".

You were as much a... uh... strange person when you called yourself magdalen.

If you had the sense God promised a doorknob, maybe you would change the absurd "Cheers" sign-off at the end of each post and it would be harder to recognise you. But no, you are what you are

I hear NetMums is great this time of year. Maybe try your luck there for a while before hitting us again under another name.

Cotes,
Actually I hang out on vaccination threads. I used to be magdalen here, but I prefer Rosewind. If I actually worried about anyone noticing I was one and the same person I'd have probably not used the same way of finishing my posts.
I sign off with "cheers" for easy recognition, actually. Works, doesn't it?
Cheers,
Rosewind

Most scientists would be cautious about saying things like 'MMR does not cause autism' and 'there is no link between MMR and autism'. It's a bit too final. AFAIK there are still investigations being carried out into triggers for autism in genetically susceptible children.

Cheers,

BM

Most scientists would be cautious about saying things like 'eating turnips does not cause cancer' and 'there is no link between turnips and cancer'. It's a bit too final.

Well, no PJ, they probably wouldn't say that because there is some evidence that brassica vegetables have a protective effect against cancer.

Bumbleymummy,
'Most scientists would be cautious about saying things like "MMR does not cause autism"..."
Yes, which is exactly why I have let the scientists speak for themselves by quoting directly from the papers above and linking to the actual papers. That way I make it quite clear what they are saying.
Cheers,
Rosewind

Ok, so you're not a scientist then RW?

Hi front doorstep, vaccines scare me because of possible complications but not vaccinating scares me more. I know two older people who nearly died of polio and still walk with a terrible limp and one who is blind in one eye due to damage done by measles. Thousands of people have died, become disabled or blinded due to some of the terrible diseases that spread amongst humans. However, I do think that too many vaccines are given and quite often clumped together which could be potentially dangerous. I think those of us under the age of about 55 didn't grow up seeing the terrible damage that these diseases have done because effective vaccination programmes had been introduced so we have not experienced seeing many of these diseases first hand and I, for one, am deeply grateful for that.

Wouldn't want people to think there was still polio would we!

It's around. It's traveling unchecked through Syria, and as most people have no symptoms (not that my mother will believe me) we have no idea how many cases there are, just that some have been seen in refugee camps.

Most scientists would be cautious about saying things like 'MMR does not cause autism' and 'there is no link between MMR and autism'. It's a bit too final.

No, it's because with science it is incredibly difficult to prove anything, that's why evolution is still a theory, there is loads of evidence, but scientifically it has not been proved.

The same with Pythagoras, no one has managed to use numbers to get it to not work, but you still can't say it has been proved. (actually it might have been recently - but obviously not by Pythagoras)

Bumbleymummy,
I'm not publishing a scientific paper here, am I? I'm commenting on a discussion forum. It doesn't really matter whether I have a MA from Oxford and an MSc. and a decade long career as a scientist, does it?
Cheers,
Rosewind

Sassh, yes, many people don't realise that around 95% of polio cases are asymptomatic. 0.1-2% of polio cases are paralytic polio.

Just making a point about certain posters using such definite language when not even the scientists themselves do so.

Do you actually have those things RW?