Yet another family win their MMR case in the US.

[Beachcomber]

Looks like keeping the word autism out of things improves one's chances of winning.

www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/106107

childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2009/06/14/juliawinsmmrcase/

Hi beachcomber - thanks for that.

I have obviously read it at the wrong time of night but in your second linked article, I clicked onthis link and was hoping you could help me understand something. About halfway down they are talking about single measles jab and autism and say the risk is 5 to 9 times greater with the single jab - but greater than what? Greater than with no jab, or greater than with the MMR?

I am too lazy tired and fuddled to work it out for myself and wondered if you could do a better job for me, please? Ta lots.

Hi thumbwitch. The article you refer to is written by Clifford Miller reexamining the Honda/Rutter study, often refered to as the Japanese study.

The section that you mention re 5 to 9 times greater risk is in relation to single vaccines versus MMR as studied by Takahashi et al. The study claims that the risk of ASD is 5 to 9 times greater in children who had single vaccines than in those who had MMR. The paper claims to refute Wakefield's hypothesis when in fact it doesn't come even close to testing it (only 1 of the 21 cases studied had regressive autism). The practice at the time in Japan was to give the single vaccines at the same time or at very close intervals which boils down to the same thing as giving MMR. This is yet another paper refuting claims that Wakefield has never made.

Anyway the paper is being mentioned not because it links MMR with autism (it doesn't and the aim of this study seems to be to exonerate MMR) but because it shows that Honda/Rutter failed to take into account the fact that information about single vaccines administration was clearly available and that single vaccines given at the same time or close together as was the practice in Japan at the time needed to be investigated in relation to ASD rates. The Honda/Rutter paper is touted of being proof that when MMR is withdrawn ASD rates continue to rise and therefore MMR is not a factor in ASD rates. In fact the paper can equally be used to demonstrate that there is a clear relationship between ASD rates and vaccination rates in general. Indeed this paper (Honda/Rutter) is used by many experts to back up the vaccine/autism hypothesis, a hypothesis which is much more complex than MMR = autism in susceptible children.

This paper (Honda/Rutter) is one of the reasons that Drs like Dr Halverson suggest an interval of six months to one year between single vaccines. (You have to scroll down the FAQs a bit to get to this).

Indeed this paper can be solidly used to demonstrate that concerns about overloading of children's systems and the culmulative and synergestic of different vaccines are valid and need to be examined urgently. It also shows that this is about a lot more than just the triple vaccine MMR. It also shows that if you design a study with the sole aim of exonerating MMR then you are going to have to turn your back on a lot of evidence and remain oddly lacking in scientific curiousity.

Of course it would be impossible to do for ethical reasons but it would be very interesting to conduct a study which examines the effect of MMR, both as a triple and as well spaced single vaccines on previously unvaccinated children.

Does that answer your question? Got a bit carried away .

Yep, pretty full answer, thank you! I got a wee bit panicked when I saw the increased risk from the single vaccines hence my plea for help - but you have managed to calm that down again. Cheers!

Oops typo, meant culmulative and synergestic effect.

You're welcome thumbwitch.

The Japanese study as interpreted by Clifford Miller is actually pretty explosive stuff. It definitely suggests that we need to examine the vaccine schedule as a whole (never done to test for safety) and that we really need to consider which vaccines are of benefit to the individual and stop handing vaccines out like vitamin pills. It also puts the concepts of herd immunity and vaccinating for the greater good firmly on unethical ground.

If, as suggested here (and by other studies), the ability of infants to respond well to increasing numbers of vaccines is questionnable then we need to re examine risk/benefit on a purely individual basis. Administration of any vaccines which do not have a robustly demonstrated efficacy and clear benefit for that individual would be a breach of medical ethics and would be considered an assault.

The Japanese study was published in 2005 so you would think that the questions it poses would be some way to being resolved by now. Shame on the UK government for refusing to even examine the issues raised.

Forgot to say that another implication would be that it would be unethical to vaccinate a person without testing their immunity first.

This puts the MMR booster in particular on very shaky ground.

I am so happy that the family won their case. I dread to think the anguish and pain and suffering that they have had to go through.

It makes sense for the families to take autism out because if the courts were to agree that vaccines cause autism then there will be a massive lawsuit on a worldwide scale and they can't afford that and the government will not allow it. MMR is used in over 60 countries and every country will be implicated.

I hope that this gives hope to all the other families.

thanks, very interesting reading. can I trouble the well-informed ladies on this thread to ask whether there have been instances of bad reaction to the DTP pre-school booster?

Yes TC, but not necessarily autism iyswim. The vaccine in that combination most likely to cause problems is the P. Diptheria and tetanus are some of the safest vaccinations (with the proviso that of course that doesn't mean 100%). Pertussis is one of the more problematic ones - especially if your child is prone to seizures.

Interesting factoid. IN the States the vaccine manufacturers used to have to pay an amount per shot given into a compensation fund - they paid according to the safety of the vaccine, so for DT they paid a few cents per shot, for DTP is was a few dollars.

Always thought that said quite a lot!

Thanks very much MrsT. need to do more reading around I think before I take DS for DTP booster (though DS has no history seizures, and you correctly guessed it's ASD that's my concern). Given DS had measles just before Xmas, I no longer have any real dilemma about the MMR booster(!).