The Lancet Finally Withdraws Infamous Autism/Vaccine Paper

|

Vaccine image

The prestigious British medical journal The Lancet is fully and formally retracting the 1998 study that sparked the autism/vaccine scare. That study allegedly found:

Onset of behavioural symptoms was associated, by the parents, with measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination in eight of the 12 children, … We identified associated gastrointestinal disease and developmental regression in a group of previously normal children, which was generally associated in time with possible environmental triggers.

Since its publication, study after study could find no such correlation between vaccination and the development of autism. The immediate reason for this long overdue retraction is that the U.K.'s General Medical Council just sanctioned lead researcher on that study, Canadian gastroenterologist Andrew Wakefield, for acting unethically. The retraction should end this harmful controversy, but I fear that the Wall Street Journal is right when it suggests:

… while the withdrawal supports the scientific evidence that vaccinations don't cause autism, it isn't likely to persuade advocacy groups who still believe in the link.

In fact, the anti-vaccine group SafeMinds has already jumped to the defense of Wakefield, declaring:

SafeMinds is very disappointed by the GMC's [General Medical Council] findings  The false testimony and the ensuing GMC FTP hearing have had the effect of delaying necessary research into cause and treatment for autism, and dissuading scientists from pursuing research relating to vaccines as a cause of chronic disease.

Sigh.

NEXT: Amid Haitian Devastation, Green Shoots

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. EXCELLENT. THIS WAS DONE, OF COURSE, TO FORCE JENNY MCCARTHY TO SHUT HER TRAP AND GO BACK TO POSING NAKED.

    WELL DONE, LANCET, WELL DONE.

    1. As others are doubtless already aware, this isn’t exactly the first time anyone has ever busted the Lancet for lying.

      Whoever managed to force a retraction from that rag does deserve some kudos for it, since it’s about as difficult to get a retraction from those scum as it’s going to be to get one from the greentards running RealClimate.

    2. Jenny McCarthy is wrong, but I grew up around autism (my mother works in the field, and I spent summers at her school). I can empathize with her. She’s desperate, is all. A lot of parents want to believe that there was a reason their children were afflicted with the condition. Children tend to develop typically before a sudden manifestation of symptoms. As my mother always says, there’s a mourning period after this happens. From that, your Jenny McCarthies are born. They need something to believe in, to fight for.

      I definitely think she’s doing damage out there, but I understand why she is what she is. This isn’t Al Gore we’re talking about. This is a mother. Mostly, I feel bad for her.

  2. Hey, Ehrlich is still quoted as an authority; why should Wakefield be any different?

    1. Yep, and the Lancet is still called “prestigious”, see first line above.

  3. I extend my deepedt symapties that your child/niece/somekidyouknow has autism. Your anecdote still does not prove that vaccines cause autism.

    The above prebuttal is for the vaccine autism nutjobs who are, like moths to a flame, irresistably attracted to Hit & Run posts that use those two keywords.

    1. My aunt was a nurse for 20 years and saw things happen to kids when they got these shots they would have convulsions and stuff, man!

      1. Most immediate reactions are due to psychosomatic reactions to fear of the shot itself, not the vaccine.

        1. That’s massively interesting. Cite?

  4. While the withdrawal supports the scientific evidence that vaccinations don’t cause autism, people are retarded.

    1. There is evidence that the existence of Thimerosal has in fact made people retarded.

      1. There is evidence that the existence of Thimerosal has in fact made people retarded.

        byline: Dawn Prate, citizen journalist

        Is a citizen journalist anything like a statistician or an MD? From the article: Autism affects 500,000 to 1.5 million Americans and has grown at an annual rate of 10 to 17 percent since the late 1980s.

        At that rate of growth approximately 100% of the population will be autistic by 2050.

        1. At which point it becomes normal, problem solved.

    2. some people are retired and they can’t help it they were born with lack of oxygen

  5. Good or bad science, I really don’t like the precedent of a journal retracting an article.

    1. Yeah, heaven forbid they act responsibly and correct an error. Who wants a medical science journal to do that!?

      1. I’m positive you have a graveyard full of slain strawmen.

    2. Retractions are not issued simply because of bad science. They usually only happen when there is evidence of intentional falsification of results.

      And the journals don’t take retracted papers off their site; they add a not that basically says they wouldn’t have accepted the paper if they knew then what they know now.

    3. Next thing you know, they might retract the 1,000,000 Iraqis Killed! article.

      1. Actually, it was 650,000, but who’s counting?
        Anyhow, in a preview of the Stewart smack-down of Olberman, New Scientist sorta ‘corrected’ it to ~50K max, and they weren’t sure.
        Lancet ignored it.

  6. The claim that vaccines cause Autism has to be one of the biggest hoaxes outside of global warming. Get a grip on the scientific method people!

    1. Piltdown man?

      1. Moron. Piltdown Man is an example of the success of the scientific method. It was proposed, then scientists proved it was a hoax, using the methods of science. Who do you think proved it was a hoax… fairies, using magic?

  7. You’re not helping, Cookie.

    1. Why do you say that? The Autism link has never been proven.

      1. It’s more like, global warming is one of the biggest hoaxes outside of vaccines causing autism.

        1. While maybe not the best analogy in the world, Man-made global warming has not been proven either.

          1. You say that, but there is a consensus among climate scientists that AGW is happening. Only a complete imbecile would compare the two. In fact I would say, anti-AGW people are more comparable to anti-vaccine people as they go against the mainstream point of view.

            I’m not saying either view is correct/incorrect, but both the anti-vaccine crowd and the anti-AGW are disagreeing with scientific consensus. You may disagree with the consensus, but that is because you are exactly like the anti-vaccine crowd…you only hear what you want to hear.

            1. Peter, I would argue that there are plenty of scientists that dispute AGW. At best, the evidence is conflicting. But surely you must be right, having to resort to ad hominem attacks and all.

            2. “””You may disagree with the consensus, but that is because you are exactly like the anti-vaccine crowd…you only hear what you want to hear.”””

              But that’s exactly what you are doing. You are ignoring those in the science community that disagree, in order to believe a consensus exists.

              The science community is split on global warming. There is nothing remotely resembling a consensus about the vaccine / autisim connection.

              1. There is certainly a consensus, and the science is on the side of the doctors and studies that prove vaccines do not cause autism. The fact that a few crackpots are louder than usual says something about public ignorance, not about scientific disagreement.

                Anyone can disagree about anything, if one side ignores the evidence.

  8. Lancet retraction or no Lancet retraction, I’d still tap Jenny McCarthy.

    1. Yeah, I’d tap her back in 1996.

  9. I’m sympathetic to the fear that parents have over, well, everything, but there is a truly deep and nasty place in hell for the plaintiff’s attorneys, doctors, and others that fanned the flames of vaccination fears for their own purposes.

    Even the Jenny McCarthys of the world can be forgiven to some extent–we’re collectively stupid for listening to someone like her. Naturally she doesn’t know what the hell she’s talking about–she’s a person famous for being naked, not for her medical knowledge.

    1. And the goofy faces in photos. Don’t forget the making of goofy faces.

      1. She’s such a silly and fun naked person.

    2. I’m sympathetic to the fear that parents have over, well, everything

      I’m not. Hysterical fear “for the children” has fucked us all in a lot of ways. So fuck hyperventilating pussy parents. OH LOOK A CHILD MOLESTER

      1. WHERE?

      2. Someday, when a small child approaches you, hands you the results of a DNA test, and says, “Daddy”, you will understand.

        On the flip side, we’ve become stupidly overprotective in this country.

    3. Pro l, whereas we should listen to you because your famous for________?

      1. Because we’ve followed his commentary for awhile and found his rhetoric reliable and sound. Not because he’s famous (or not).

        1. I’m a famous Hit & Run commenter. Which means that something like twenty people want to follow my personal life on TMZ.

          1. You are so right about your genius & expertise. I just randonmly picked an artice and found one of your “reliable and sound” posts:Pro Libertate|12.11.09 @ 9:46AM|#
            “The real issue with the swine flu is how hard it hits healthy people in certain risk classes. Like pregnant women. It’s even worse fro pregnant men” I think The Art-P.O.G. thinks you are the pretty blond surfer dude on TMZ.

            1. Busted again!

              1. I will keep score for you. ?

  10. It’s OK to retract this false danger. We can easily replace the scare mongering with the new killer menace of BPA in sippy cups.

  11. Well, with AGW looking a little less settled and anti-vax looking extremely pointless, I guess everyone will have to focus on something new to be scared of. Like the LHC or libertarian militias or something.

    1. Water Fluoridation!

      1. Sticky gas pedals! It’s a plot to thin the Asian herd.

        1. I think it’s a plot to thin the American herd.

          What about obesity? Can we ratchet that up a bit?

          1. Sounds like a grand slam to me.

            1. Okay, that one works.

      2. CHEMTRAILS!

    2. 2012!

  12. I think it’s a little discouraging to see medical issues like this so heavily politicized. Some of the comments I’ve read elsewhere from the researchers in the original study made it sound like they were as interested in pulling the soapbox out from under Wakefield as much as anything else.

    I mean, if this were about the science, and not about how people use it, then researchers coming back and saying their data was inconclusive probably wouldn’t get much attention. …but it’s nice to see stuff like this covered in a libertarian context–’cause I’d hate to see it used to justify forcibly immunizing people.

    P.S. …and for the record. If it was counter-intuitive before, for people with conditions that make their immune systems attack things that aren’t there… …to take vaccines that charge up their immune systems to attack things that aren’t there? It still is.

    1. P.S. …and for the record. If it was counter-intuitive before, for people with conditions that make their immune systems attack things that aren’t there… …to take vaccines that charge up their immune systems to attack things that aren’t there? It still is.

      Your immune system sees ghosts? Like little pacman cells chasing the little ghost germs? Pow! Pow! Chomp! One hundren points! Get the strawberry!

      That sounds like fun!

    2. Forcible immunizations? Is someone abducting people on the street, shoving them into parked cars, and holding them down while they stick a who-knows-where-it’s-been filthy syringe full of poison into their pitiful cowering bodies?

      No, of course not. What you mean is mandating vaccinations. Words have meanings, as a certain popular philosopher once said.

  13. Oh please, we live in a land where (some) people believe that contrails are a government plot to poison us and where previously debunked science continues to be raised time and again as gospel.

    1. Yeah, posion us. People that think that never thought their position through. If we are sick, we can’t work, if we can’t work, we can’t pay taxes. No taxes, what would the government spend?

    2. So, so true. People who believe vaccines cause autism honestly seem to believe that vaccine manufacturers fiendishly plot to make us ill. No doubt inspired by Satan, the Illuminati, Sauron, and a consortium of fifteenth-level Greater Liches.

  14. Hmm, Asian Carp anyone?

    Just don’t mention tobacco or that 32 year old who rides overpriced obsolete cruizing bikes will bring teh wallz.

  15. SafeMinds is very disappointed by the GMC’s [General Medical Council] findings The false testimony and the ensuing GMC FTP hearing have had the effect of delaying necessary research into cause and treatment for autism, and dissuading scientists from pursuing research relating to vaccines as a cause of chronic disease.

    The Red Queen would be so proud of them.

    1. I know all about proving negatives, blah, blah, blah, but I have to say, I’m not entirely against research on the effects of vaccines on our immune systems.

      When you look at things like UC and MS, as opposed to cardiology and cancer, it sure seems like there’s an awful lot we don’t know about autoimmune disorders. …and their relationship to vaccines or anything else.

      The less science there is on something, the more susceptible we are to snake oil salesmen–they aren’t going anywhere until science can explain some of this stuff better than it does now.

      The packaging on the medication for some of the most common autoimmune disorders says that they don’t know how it works…

      Plausibility may be no substitute for testing, but if plausibility’s all people have, what should we expect them to do? Stop looking for explanations for why these things happened to them and their children?

      That would be unreasonable.

      1. Plausibility may be no substitute for testing, but if plausibility’s all people have, what should we expect them to do? Stop looking for explanations for why these things happened to them and their children?

        But that’s exactly what happened. Because of these people, research into how autism happens was delayed or did not receive funding, and instead governments, under pressure from fear mongers, were forced to divert those funds into the rabbit hole of vaccines cause disease (not a new idea the fear mongers have been out there for over a century). Research into the causes of autism was delayed by fraudulent scientists like Wakefield, and fearful parents who didn’t have the scientific training to know better.

        1. I’m sure you’re not suggesting that taxpayers shouldn’t have any say in how money used for taxpayer funded research is spent, so with that out of the way…

          Isn’t it unreasonable to expect people to not make their own associations given a lack of science on the issues they care about?

          Your kid develops MS, the worst kind. Don’t you want to know why? ’cause nobody knows why. They know the autoimmune system permeates the blood-brain barrier to attack something in the gray matter of the brain, and that’s something that isn’t supposed to happen, hence the term “blood-brain barrier”.

          But science doesn’t know why it happens. And all I’m trying to get across is that as long as science doesn’t know why, and can’t rule out possible contributing factors like vaccines, which by design are created to trigger artificial immune responses, then you’re being less rational than these concerned parents if you expect them not to press for more research.

          I mean, unless I’m mistaken, this study doesn’t claim to show that vaccines do not provoke autism; the revised opinions of these researchers are just saying that the data isn’t as conclusive as they previously thought and that their original conclusions should be disregarded.

          Think the old “Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny” debate from evolutionary theory. The guy that was famous for that idea and making that argument is alleged to have fudged his data, and the strict interpretation of that process has been thoroughly debunked.

          …but that doesn’t mean there aren’t any connections between ontogeny and phylogeny or that those connections aren’t evidence of the evolutionary process. There are connections and those connections are evidence of the evolutionary process.

          So let’s not throw all the bathwater out yet. Just ’cause somebody overplayed their hand doesn’t necessarily mean their cards aren’t any good.

  16. Saltpeter in the water supply!

    THE FREEMASONS ARE PUTTING SALTPETER IN THE WATER SUPPLY!

    Somebody notify Pamela Anderson.

    1. Actually, I was always told that it was the school board who what putting saltpeter in the lunch milk.

      (Didn’t work. At least in my case.)

    2. And don’t forget the harp antenna. Caused that earthquake in Haiti, and China last year too. For some reason we haven’t tested it on Iran or North Korea, though. I guess we need to get it tweaked just right.

  17. You know what we need? We need a good asteroid apocalypse conspiracy…..

    ……(checks calendar)…..

    IT’S THE GREAT MASONIC-SALTPETER-MAYANCALENDAR-NAZI-ILLUMINATI-DAVINCI-FAKEJESUS-PLANETX-CONTRAIL ASTEROID APOCALYPSE CONSPIRACY!!!

    I vote we go with a naked Scarlett Johansson for the hot blonde crazy lady.

    1. You missed the Gnomes of Zurich, the CIA and the Tri-Lateral Commission.

      1. And the Rockefellers.

        1. Checking in.

          1. can we have bonfires?

            1. Frickin’ amateurs

      2. Anyone have the protocols? I’m always leaving those damn things around where anyone can find them.

        1. Ha ha ha ha, awesome use of a joke handle.

  18. Pff, it’s a bonafide religion with the Thimerosal people. You’ll never break them of that conviction. It says it right there in their bible: And on the third day, Thimerosal caused Autism.

    That’s all the evidence they need.

  19. I’m still not lining up to advocate injecting potentially toxic shite into any developing child’s system….

    1. Do you know what smallpox and polio were?

    2. Have fun in the 15th century!

    3. Uh huh…
      I bet you still eat, drink and breathe. All those activities involve the intake of potentially toxic shit.

      I’ll take the potential (and completely unproven, except by Jenny McCarthy’s breasts) danger of vaccines over the very real danger of small pox, measels, diptheria, tetanus, etc. And this isn’t a thing where I’m ok with people making bad decisions based on false evidence. We need herd immunity for vaccines to be maximally effective.

      1. Odds are, Jenny McCarthy’s breast milk (like any lactating woman’s) is more toxic than your average series of childhood vaccines.

    4. It is true that tetanus is all-natural, and measles is a much better way to lose your hearing than all that unnatural loud music.

      1. I advocate treating tetanus the natural, Maasai way. You knock out the child’s two front teeth so you can feed them when the jaw is locked close. All natural!

    5. Do you think it should be a crime to feed developing children tuna fish? Because their systems absorb many, many times more mercury from eating tuna fish even once than from any vaccines, regardless of when the vaccines were given.

  20. Vaccination should be a personal choice and not be forced upon anyone by the state. That would end the controversy as far as I’m concerned. Those who are worried about vaccines don’t have to receive them.

    1. Can we make you keep your disease carrying brood at home? Do a search for “herd immunity”, and you can see that you are imposing a non-zero risk on your neighbors.

      1. That type of logic can be used to justify forcing damn near anything on damn near anyone. For the record, I have all my vaccinations up to date, with the exception of the flu shot. Everytime I get that one, and I mean every fucking time, I get “flu-like” symptoms for 6 or 7 days. But if you insist, I can just come over to your house when the vomiting and diahrea starts.

        1. You can try and come over, but one trace of zombieness and you can kiss your brainpan goodbye.

        2. That type of logic can be used to justify forcing damn near anything on damn near anyone

          no it can’t.

          1. The logic behind forcing people to get vaccinations: If I do “X”, and you don’t do “X”; then it diminshes the the results I get by doing “X”. If you think that that exact train of thought hasn’t been used in the past to justify everything from mandatory prayer to zoning restrictions, you’re either willfully ignorant or functionally retarded.

            1. “”If you think that that exact train of thought hasn’t been used in the past to justify everything from mandatory prayer to zoning restrictions, you’re either willfully ignorant or functionally retarded.””

              Neither mandatory prayer, nor zoning restrictions will cause epidemics of diseases. If you don’t know that, then your last sentence applies to you.

              There is a real thing as public health risk from infectious diseases. I’m not talking about people jumping on the bandwangon to justify lesser dangers, or non-dangerous things, such as prayer and zoning.

              It makes sense to address some things as public health issues. But that power should be used sparingly and wisely.

              1. You’re right Dr. Tricky, there is never a reason to not take the government mandated, one-size fits all cure for public safety. I just thank the good lord every day that you’re here to wisely decide just where that line should be drawn…wait, you’re not in charge? Then who is? Oh, it’s a bunch of unscrupulous assholes who have no problem forcing you to do something at the point of a gun for either votes or a cash donation? The hell of it is, I actually agree that everyone should get vaccines for meningitis or similarily deadly diseases. Thing is, I realize, apparently unlike you, that I don’t know what’s best for every person in every circumstance. But I guess if it’s for the greater good…

                1. If you refuse vacines and get sick, is it uncharitable to call you and your brood disease carrying dangers? Further, when the smallpox outbreak hits your house are you going to break quaratine? At what point do we as your neighbors tell you to get your diseased ass back in the house while a small laser dot glows on your chest?

                  1. If you refuse vacines and get sick, is it uncharitable to call you and your brood disease carrying dangers?
                    You can say whatever you want. Last I checked the first amendment was still valid, despite the wishes of an apparently moronic majority.

                    Further, when the smallpox outbreak hits your house are you going to break quaratine?
                    I can think of some reasons I would, like if my house was on fire, or my “diseased brood” were starving.

                    At what point do we as your neighbors tell you to get your diseased ass back in the house while a small laser dot glows on your chest?
                    Probably at the same point you would if I had gotten the vaccination. Didn’t you just tell someone to read up on the importance of heard immunity? I would suggest you take your own advice. An since you’ve threatened to shoot me twice in as many comments, I think I’ll leave you with this quote from the esteemed Dr. Dre:
                    “Now you wanna run around, talkin’ ’bout guns like I ain’t got none. What you think I sold ’em all?”

                    1. Your right to not vaccinate ends at my immune system, Buster, and if you get sick and start spreading it around because you’re too stupid to vaccinate, expect someone to defend their lives and health against you. Libertarian enough for you now?

    2. People should also be allowed to shit into the public water supply, too. There are few functions more fundamental than excreting waste, and few rights more fundamental than that of excreting it where you want, when you want. Can I get an amen from my libertarian brethren?

  21. horseshit…and just in time for everyone’s Govmt Administered flu shot. NO THANKS!

    1. I recommend you allow your doctor to administer your flu shot instead.

  22. “TO FORCE JENNY MCCARTHY TO SHUT HER TRAP”

    Don’t count on it.

    1. Indeed. Like anything else, those who totally invested themselves in this can’t un-invest now; they’d look like fools and chumps. So solely to save their tattered egos, they’ll continue to bang the drum for vaccine autism, and will continue to influence some (rather stupid) people.

      It’s really quite despicable.

  23. The Lancet has a long history of publishing shitty science.

    1. Vaccines cause autism
    2. GMOs cause organ damage
    3. 110% of all Iraqis killed in Iraq war.

    1. 110% of all Iraqis killed in Iraq war.

      That’s terrible! I hope they’re all ok!

  24. Wow, I was wondering if we would ever see that again!

    Jess
    http://www.web-privacy.cz.tc

  25. I was wondering if we would ever see that again!

    Jewel
    http://www.web-privacy.cz.tc

  26. Positively Orwellian.

    From the text of the retraction, not posted by voodoo-scientist Bailey:

    In particular, the claims in the original paper that children were “consecutively referred” and that investigations were “approved” by the local ethics committee have been proven to be false. Therefore we fully retract this paper.
    from the published record.

    So basically, a political body (“local ethics committee”) has retacted some claim of approval after political pressure brought by the establishment.

    The flaky opinion of some “local ethics committee” has a bearing on the science of injecting mercury into the human bloodstream?

    Really?

    1. Hey, can you tell us about chemtrails, 9/11, and ZOG as well?

    2. Wow, you mean experimenting on kids without the parent’s consent is “unethical”? What kind of world are we coming to?

    3. So basically, a political body (“local ethics committee”) has retacted some claim of approval after political pressure brought by the establishment.

      Did the ethics committee approve and then withdraw, or just never approve? The article reads like it was the latter.

  27. Peer Review Is Not What You Think
    Shannon Love says this nicely [edited]

    “Peer Review” says nothing about conclusions. It is the fate of most scientific papers to be proven completely wrong.

    Peer review protects a journal’s reputation. The journal hires experts to check for basic errors in math or methodology, along with grammar and spelling. It offloads responsibility for publishing bad papers onto anonymous scientists. It is a form of blame-passing that everyone would like to use. It does not confirm or refute experimental or theoretical conclusions.

    Some people will say that a scientific result is true because it appears in a peer reviewed journal. That is the weakest defense possible. It means only that some editor and his reviewers found it to meet their minimum quality standards for publishing. It meets no standards if the editors and peer reviewers are corrupt.

    1. Completely agree. Think about it … who do they get to review this stuff? Other researchers … who are most likely far too busy to spend a lot of time reading and analyzing a paper.

      A LOT of peer review is political, too. There are factions within any scientific community, and if you espouse the wrong “ideology”, reviewers from the opposing camp will reject your papers. This is absolutely vicious in biology, or so I’ve heard.

      1. Shannon Love says that?

        Well, god, I’d change my mind, if I din’t think my OWN thoughts…

        1. Are you saying that you never relate the excellent thought of another person? Or, possibly, you relate it, but you don’t attribute it.

      2. Actually, a lot of peer review is other scientists trying to replicate or disprove another scientist’s findings. Some of those people are Ph.D. candidates who are trying to get their doctorate. That’s what they’re dedicating themselves to. To say that peer review is a rubber stamp demonstrates massive amounts of ignorance of what researchers actually do.

        My guess is Shannon Love never had a really close friend go through a Ph.D. or at least never talked to them about what they’re dedicating their lives to.

        1. Obviously, that happens after publication, but that’s the real part where the findings get reviewed.

        2. I happen to be a PhD candidate.

          How many articles have YOU reviewed.

          My advisor sends me the shit that he gets and asks me to write summaries for him, so he won’t have to read the papers himself.

          1. Me zero. My fiance a handful. My best friend from college, quite a few. I’ve never done it, nor claimed that I did it. But I’ve heard plenty from people intimately in the process. Is it occasionally political? Sure, but name a single human endeavor in the world that isn’t. A process not being perfect doesn’t mean that it’s not a good process.

        3. To Mo,

          You are confusing Scientific Review with Peer Review. Scientific Review deeply analyzes and replicates. Peer Review is only a reading of the paper and an opinion about whether it is flawed or worth publishing.

  28. People, people…the truth is but a few keystrokes away, at Yahoo! Answers:

    “hell no. you are born with autism it is not something that just grows on u from a shot maybe she was autistic and they just never caught it until then and a friends cousin that sure sounds like a long commute could be a rumor but no u can not get autism form it.”

    1. I got autism from sitting on a toilet

  29. Hmmm. Could I possibly have been wrong that the profits of Big Pharma are its incentives to effect data to be manipulated in ‘scientific research’ on the thermerisol-autism connection? Hard to believe Big Pharma wouldn’t have wanted to achieve ‘scientific’ results that benefit those profits, at the expense of the consumer. The only difference between this ‘no connection’ faux science and global warming hoax is that there have been no e-mails hacked between the scientist conspirators and Big Pharma. Big Pharma doesn’t want to pay damages determined in wrongful death suits it would otherwise lose if a connection is ‘proven’. If you non-believers had contracted autism after a vaccine shot, you’d be the first to start yellin’.

    1. Ummm.. yeah, but we didn’t contract autism from a vaccination and apparently no one else has either… That’s the point of the retraction of the study….

      1. I didn’t read the above article but one I did read said the author of the study was being paid by lawyers looking to represent the victims.

        1. “Wakefield was the lead author of the report. He wrote that the parents of eight of the 12 children blamed MMR: they said symptoms of autism had set in within days of vaccination.

          The Sunday Times has now established that four, probably five, of these children were covered by the legal aid study. And Wakefield himself had been awarded up to ?55,000 to assist their case by finding scientific evidence of the link.”

          http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t…..027603.ece

          And that’s from Feb 2004.

    2. LibertyGal, you can’t prove a negative. And if thermisol caused Autism, the reduction and ongoing trend of elimination would surely have a cause and effect, but as it stands now, the reduction of thermisol has coincided with the increase of Autism.

      It begs the question — could the rise of Autism be related to something else? Awareness?? These days, if your child spaces a few seconds and shows an extra interest in a particular toy, they’re diagnosed with Autsim. Eccentric kids are now Autistic. In my day, they were just considered “weird”.

      1. Based on the correlation we now have between thimerosal being removed while autism has gone up, it looks like thimerosal actually prevents autism.

        1. They are looking in the wrong place.

          It’s the chemtrails that cause autism. Compare the data between increase of flights and increase of autism.

    3. I read the whooping cough doesn’t really exist and it is a conspiracy by the drug manfacturers and how many people get polio anyway if it was so bad why aren’t people getting it all the time its another part of the conspiracy and I dont even know that the germans had their own measles that sounds unfair does that mean the germans invented it and if they did shouldn’t they have to pay us when we get sick and if they do why would I want to get a shot and not get paid?

    4. If you non-believers had contracted autism after a vaccine shot, you’d be the first to start yellin’.

      Yes, you just proved the anti vaccine crowd also has a vested interest in maintaining that vaccines cause autism. For the people, their life view demands it, they NEED revenge against someone for their child being sick. For the non profit groups, like all beaurocracies, they need funding to perpetuate themselves.

      This Which is why we use science and not personal experience to decide what is true and what is not true. I have a friend that sees ghosts, does that mean ghosts are real? Or does it mean she suffers from hallucinations?

      Thermisol is not used anymore, yet autism keeps increasing. What does that tell you?

      The anti vaccine people have been around for 150 years, since vaccines started, and before thermisol was used. They always have SOME reason to say vaccines are harmful.

      Contrary to what you think, a mere 5 minutes of research should prove that vaccines are NOT, in fact, a big moneymaker. Drug manufacturers don’t make big bucks off a shot you only take once or twice in your entire life. They’d rather sell you something you need repeated doses. So no, there is no incentive to lie and make up facts to try to push vaccines, it would be more cost effective to spend that effort on new drugs for chronic conditions, or to treat you AFTER you get the disease, rather than try to prevent it.

    5. Why is it that retarded people with no real evidence always resort to the claim that “big business” somehow faked all the results?

      1. It’s the same group that thinks all orgasams are fake.

        1. Not mine, bud. Not all of them, anyway.

    6. Wow, the sensitivity. If we had contracted autism for any reason, we’d be autistic. Besides, a significant fraction of us are on the high-functioning side of the autism spectrum, and we don’t want to have to suffer from preventable communicable diseases any more than you do. Even though we are “damaged” people, in your opinion, we still have a right not to be sick and die.

  30. If you non-believers had contracted autism after a vaccine shot, you’d be the first to start yellin’.

    Nah, I’d just stare at the wall.

  31. Now they just have to retract 90% of the crap they have published the last 10 years and they will go back to being a respectable medical journal.

  32. Autism is the next step in our evolution. Embrace it.

    1. People suffering from serious autism spectrum disorders might disagree with you… if they could. Even folks like me, on the high-functioning end of the autism spectrum, aren’t exactly diagnosed by our ability to fit in socially or psychologically.

      Do I embrace my Asperger’s diagnosis? No, I don’t. I’m not significantly impaired (though I admit I might have been as a child), and I resent the spotlight being removed from those who have true, nightmarish problems, to focus it on folks like me who are, for all practical purposes, normal or better.

      After all, I have a tested IQ in the 140s. If you have an average IQ, around 100, I think of you as mildly retarded. Do you embrace your intellectual mediocrity as a next evolutionary step?

      Incidentally, the whole idea of evolution as a stepwise, goal=oriented progression is profoundly ignorant.

  33. halfdog,

    No attention span, lack of social understanding, seemingly random outbursts… Yes, we’re all evolving into blackberry users.

    With autism at least you don’t have to buy ‘a monthly plan’. That just shows you how Generous and Kind Mother Nature is compared to evil telcos.

    Jake
    (who IS kidding!!)

  34. bestpriceforsales powershot s90 This is a huge oversight and a camera that costs this much should be able to do HD, something other cameras in this price range and size have been able to do now for over a year.

  35. bestpriceforsales powershot s90 This is a huge oversight and a camera that costs this much should be able to do HD, something other cameras in this price range and size have been able to do now for over a year.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.