Wakefield found guilty by the GMC

[manfrom]

Finally the GMC stands up and takes the right decision:

www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/jan/28/mmr-doctor-fail-children-gmc

Apparently there was heckling in court.

"One woman shouted: "These doctors have not failed our children. You are outrageous." She called the panel of experts "bastards" and accused the GMC of being a "kangaroo court". Another shouted: "This is a set-up."

So obviously they believe it's the right thing to do to falsify data and pay parents for blood samples at a kiddies birthday party....

[dons hat and flak jacket]

I think it would be interesting to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Espcecially for conditions such as eczema.

Take this for example. Now ds1 (vaccinated) developed eczema straight after his DTP jabs at 8 weeks. His younger (unvaccinated) brothers also developed eczema but not until age 4 in ds2's case and age 3 in ds3's case.

Now so what? Except that ds1's regression into profound autism (he is non-verbal) occurred after his eczema became infected with the herpes virus when he was a year old. This can be very serious - in his case it was bad and was (appropriately) treated aggressively. The possible/likely link between the e herpeticum and his regression is accepted btw by his paediatricians and neurologist although we are all aware it might not be the whole story.

So sometimes yes I wonder whether avoiding thimerosal would have avoided the eczema developing at such a young age. And he wouldn't have developed e herpeticum without the eczema and so could perhaps have avoided autism - whether it was the virus itself of the medication that finished it off (seems to be accepted could have been either).

I personally don't think that all cases of autism are caused by vaccination - but before you leap around in joy, I think that many cases of autism, and most regressive cases of autism involve the immune system. It is clear that the immune system plays a role in the development of many cases of autism Google and you will get loads of hits, here's just one and for most researchers working in this particular field there seems to be an acceptance that for some children their vaccinations play a role, for others they've had a different (usually viral) hit.

I'm not going to say a straight yes or no to your statements because autism is far more complicated than you appear to understand and current research doesn't permit a straight answer.

jackie fletcher not anti vaccine. classic...

oh probono - don't worry, I knew it was an attempt to stir.

I just don't know about the numbers involved through vaccination - I certainly know children who regressed very obviously following vaccination, then there are children such as my son where vaccination may have played a very small but important role in a sequence of events that resulted in autism.

I tend to go with the researchers I see at conferences who say that they think that vaccinations can play a role but so can infection etc etc. It's cautious but the people who say that always seem very sensible and concerned and open to individual cases having a vaccination trigger, so I tend to sit in their corner at the moment.

well you can't have it both ways - either the number of cases of autism is so small that it is undetectable in population studies, in which case it can't account for the rise in autism diagnosis and advising people generally not to vaccinate is just nuts, given the known complications of the childhood diseases the vaccinations prevent or a significant proportion of autism is caused by vaccination, in which case why the hell can't we spot it with epidemiological studies?

Anti vaccination campaigners are in many ways like aids denialists, alternative medicine proponents, agw denialists and the like. as each argument gets disproven the theories shift, twist and change to try and paste the non-changing belief onto whatever either isn't known yet or what there is (often highly suspicious) evidence for. That isn't how science works - you look at the facts first and determine what's happening - you don't decide what's happening and then try to fit it to the available evidence.

so first it was mercury causing the rise in diagnosis of autism. that was disproven (no drop in diagnoses of autism when mercury removed from vaccines), then it was MMR, that's been disproven by the epidemiological studies, now were down to it's either such a small number of cases that it's undetectable by epidemiology (in which case it can't possibly account for the rise in diagnosis of ASD...) or it's the entire 'vaccine schedule' which is at fault. no doubt when those doors are closed AOA and the like will squirm the hypothesis further round to something else.

the other option which fits the facts just fine is that the rise in autism has nothing whatsoever to do with vaccination. Maybe time would be better spent trying to find out what that is?

Or, to put it simply, do you admit that the rise in diagnosis of autism can't possibly be down to the MMR vaccine?

Um who has advised people not to vaccinate? Will you stop making up things. Wakefield told people to vaccinate, I have never told someone not to vaccinate in my life. I have never once said that the rise in autism is down to MMR, I don't know anyone who has said that. Wakefield hasn't. I have seen plenty of papers 'disproving the link between MMR and rise in autism' but since no-one has ever suggested it I'm not quite sure what the point of those papers was.

Read for example Taylor et al. They say in their conclusions that they cannot rule out a rare idiosyncratic response to the MMR in some children- that is the blinking hypothesis FGS.

Epidemiological studies have not separated out autism subgroups. You have to do that before you can have a sensible conversation about autism numbers. I don't for a moment think my son has the same condition as someone with Asperger's who had a father with AS who had a grandfather who was know for being antisocial. So I have no idea why they are lumped together. Different conditions, different etiologies.

The arguments have not changed, not at all. I linked to a current funded study looking at thimerosal. Or did you just choose to ignore that? RESEARCH has complicated the picture. Not conspiracy theorists. Go to the next IMFAR (an the biggest annual autism research conference) you will find vaccinations mentioned, you will also find lots of different models involving the immune system, and guts and viral infections and inflammation and fever, you will find multigene effects described with strong heritability, you will find single gene effects and gene-environment interactions, you will find mitochondrial cytopathies talked about and you will find talks on things like carpet cleaners. All of these different models probably have something to offer someone somewhere on the spectrum. Some will be relevant to some individuals and not others. And each little piece highlights the complexity further and reminds us that autism is not one condition.

As my son's neurologist said a few weeks ago 'it's incredibly complex'.

You seem to be thinking of autism in a very simplistic way.

I've never told anyone not to vaccinate.

saintlydamemrsturnip, your post at 11:53 really reinforces to me why it is important to invest in research in many areas.
The male:female ratio thing is interesting with regards to the research they were doing into how testosterone may be linked to autism when they were looking at possible pre natal tests like the amnio one.
And the developing brain would be an area that would benefit from the investment of more research. It might be good to understand why the brain develops too quickly at around 12 months.
As well as genetics, environmental toxins etc
There is a lot to look into

Yes agree paisley.

And the reassuring thing in all this is that the research is going on. In the States in the main but it's happening.

Also autism needs lots of research into sensory processing, especially in those with severe autism- that's slower but is beginning to take place.

I was thinking about my meeting with the neurologist (where we discussed in part what had happened to ds1) we touched on lots of areas, mitochondrial cytopathies, odd one of type genetic effects, environmental factors, diet and the gut - the paed and neuro were very pro various diets to my surprise. We covered a whole diverse range of possibilities.

I feel we're a few years too early for ds1. In 20-50 years I suspect his condition will be better understood and there will be a clinical protocol for investigation/treatment. But we're not there yet.

Right I have to go and work.

well, there was the post i quoted earlier which attributed every ASD case to vaccination. and let's not for get that beachcomber thinks Age of Autism is a credible source of information and you would be hard pressed to read the site and not come to the conclusion that it is an anti vaccination campaign group. almost every article on the front page is related to vaccination. one of it's contributors Dr ex porn star Jenny McCarthy has described vaccination as 'a choice between polio or autism' - and as for the contributors to JABS... I can only assume that they are typing whilst dribbling into their keyboards in an institution somewhere. If not then they should be.

to suggest that no-one has suggested that MMR is the cause of the rise in autism is just hilarious. where have you been for the last 14 years?

Wrt: male: female -- I read that testosterone acts to move mercury more quickly round the body and to the brain.

How true can this be? Is it a crazy idea?

anyway mso - I have a question for you.

Why would you be anti safer vaccination?

You seem to see removal of thimerosal from vaccinations as a bad thing. I don't really understand that.

Well perhaps you could find a source for me.

As I said I have read many papers that have demonstrated that MMR has not triggered a rise in autism. But I can't find the original hypothesis that suggests it is. It certainly hasn't been published anywhere, and Wakefield never said it.

We can all make up hypotheses to disprove. I rather think you have been reading the newspapers rather than the original research for the last 14 years.

Why are you unable to discuss this without resorting to being offensive?

JABS is a group of parents who believe their children were vaccine damaged. Some have had payouts so presumably the authorities believe they were too. The last post thread I read on there was written by someone whose daughter died after receiving her baby jabs. It was agreed this was the result of a vaccine, but the family was given no payout (not that that would make much difference) because she died before she reached the age of 2. It was quite a moving thread, which makes your dribbling suggestion in rather bad taste.

You do realise it's a bit odd to call people who are concerned about their child's vaccine damage as 'anti-vaccinators' don't you? They vaccinated their children, how could they be anti-vaccinators?

I think it was a pointless diversion given that there is no evidence that it has caused any problems in the first place. the action lent credibility to the cranks.

In itself the removal of thimerosal is reasonably irrelevant (except from a cost POV) as a political move (which it was) I think it was misjudged.

To commission a safer vaccine it would help to have some evidence that the ones we are using at the moment are unsafe. otherwise by changing it you are 1)needlessly lining the pockets of the pharmaceutical companies and 2)risk actually making a less safe vaccine. not to mention the implicit inference that (without any evidence to suggest it) the vaccination you are replacing was unsafe, undermining support for the vaccination programme that is protecting our children.

if it ain't broke...

Well there was no evidence because it wasn't researched.

Have you read the 2 links I've made to recent thimerosal studies above?

Anyway the review of thimerosal came before the suggestion of a link to autism afaik. It wasn't as a result of vaccine groups though. It came about because of an Act passed in America which required a review of mercury exposure in food and drugs (and a whole host of other things, that was just one part of it) . The results of that review were this:

"Our review revealed no evidence of harm caused by doses of thimerosal found in vaccines, except for local hypersensitivity reactions. At the time of our review, vaccines containing thimerosal as a preservative could expose infants to cumulative mercury at levels that exceed EPA recommendations during the first 6 months of life. The clinical significance of this conclusion is not currently known; EPA guidelines contain as much as a 10-fold safety factor and such guidelines are meant to be starting points for the evaluation of mercury exposure. However, reducing exposure to thimerosal from vaccines is merited given the goal of reducing human exposure to mercury from all sources, the feasibility of removing thimerosal as a vaccine preservative, and the desirability of ensuring public confidence in the safety of vaccines."

Before the introduction of MMR the thimerosal dose was given later and was spread out more, it's not impossible that some children who would have coped with a well spread out exposure struggled with a closer and earlier exposure.

The american administration did the correct thing with the results of the review and made moves to remove thimerosal. The UK dept of health continued to provide thimerosal containing baby jabs long after the US, Aus, NZ, Japan and pretty much the rest of Europe had removed them.

and what problems have been demonstrated to be reduced since it was removed?

Saintly: I think it originates with the Geiers.

this is one

Unfortunately this one says "it has previously been shown that testosterone significantly potentates mercury toxicity" before going into it further so am looking for previous work.

I'd be interested if you think it's interesting, Mrs T.

Mso: you won't be surprised to hear I'm not interested if you think it's rubbish: would just like to hear the opinion of someone who has a clue.

Apparently the Geiers recommend using a drug which reduces testosterone to "treat" some autistic disorders. It's wildly against the scientific consensus, it's a drug used to chemically castrate sex offenders.

oh this is utterly pointless. You just don't get it do you?

This is not about population level data, this is about individual safety. This is about individual children regressing following a period of normal development. It's not about population level effects. No problems have been demonstrated to be reduced because no-one is looking at (or collecting the right numbers. Presumably allergic reactions will have reduced, and maybe some eczema etc will have reduced (as that seems to have been a confirmed link as far as I can tell) but I don't think there are any numbers to compare with and I don't think anyone has looked. Likewise as the subgroup of children with PDD/ASD who may have been affected by autism has never been identified then you can't tell whether their numbers are going up and down.

If you continue to look at whole population level data whilst shouting 'gee looks safe from up here' then of course you are never going to notice what is going on in individuals.

The following is the sort of ongoing study that will give useful and relevant information although it still won't answer the pointless irrelevant questions you are asking.

"Mark Noble, Ph.D.
University of Rochester
$330,000 over 3 years

Vulnerability phenotypes and susceptibility to environmental toxicants: from organism to mechanism

One hypothesis regarding the association between genetic changes, environmental factors and autism is that many mutations or polymorphisms make the organism more vulnerable to later exposure in some individuals. Called the ?vulnerability phenotype?, the Noble lab hypothesizes that one potential unifying theme of the vulnerability phenotype of children with ASD is that they are more oxidized. This elevated oxidation state has been shown to be sufficient to cause dramatic changes in cellular function. In this project, Dr. Noble will test the hypotheses that genetically-based differences in oxidative status are associated with differences in vulnerability to physiological stressors in vitro and in vivo, with even greater increases in vulnerability to combinations of physiological stressors. Specifically, thimerosal and other vaccine adjuvants will be studied. The second part of the study will determine if these effects on a novel regulatory pathway called redox/Fyn/c-Cbl is a necessary mechanistic convergence for increases in vulnerability caused by a more oxidized metabolic status. These results will provide a better understanding of the biochemical effects and mechanisms of possible toxicity of vaccines and vaccine additives.

What this means for people with autism: These studies will initially focus on the combination of vaccine additives, but then examine whether a background genetic vulnerability phenotype affects the response to these additives. The results would provide new targets for intervention against the adverse effects of increased oxidative status in children with autism."

That's an amazing level of research -- what a shame the UK is so terrified of it.

thanks probono, will read properly later. It might be a little out of date in that since 2004 the understanding of oxidative states in autism (such as in the ongoing study above) has rocketed and that may affect their model.

Thanks MrsT. I know it seems a bit out there but with so many more boys than girls being affected I thought there might be something to it.

I really am a bit out there actually: have used coriander and zinc to detoxify my own mercury levels.

Big big but am really not as stupid as that makes me sound! honest guv

Oh i know lots of people use coriander!

We've never attempted to chelate - but if we did we would use coriander or start with it at least.

Chelation is always treated as something sinister, but the person I know best who had it done had it done on the NHS.