"The increasing evidence that aluminum/adjuvants cause . . . " - Page 6

[prosciencemum]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

Also interesting how sample size only matters sometimes. In that study:
"The autism group had 33 kids total. Of these, 9 of 31 (29%) were given the HepB vaccine. Compare this to 1,258 of 7,455 (17%) of the non-autism group who were given the HepB."
That is well below the threshold necessary to reliably provide statistical significance.

Wow, I didn't realise/remember the sample size was quite that small (we may have talked about this one before, but i don't remember right now).

Standard statistical counting error is the square root of the top number, so that's a 10% error on the fraction of autistic boys who had had hep b (and in fact that's an underestimate of the error in very small samples). So the two fractions differ by only just more than 1 sigma (1 times the statistical error). In normal distributions this will happen 32% of the time even if there is no difference in the two samples.

So yeah, not a very convincing difference.

[prosciencemum]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle 


It does say the study comes from a time when thim was in Hep B in the USA - it is worth noting for our non-American parents that Canada still uses a Hep B vaccine with thimerosal.  This is a little old, but it looks like the UK's shot does as well.  :http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4472485.stm.

I'm not sure why the UK still use the thimerosol containing one (although not there's no strong evidence thimerosol is harmful, most people say it was removed to placate scared parents), but I wanted to point out that in the UK HepB is not a routine vaccine. It's only given to infants at high risk of contracting HepB (if mothers test positive for example).

[MeepyCat]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle 

I work in a public library that has school visits.  I definitely see more autism now than in the past.

One reason why teachers and librarians see more autism now then they used to is the trend away from institutionalizing individuals with these disabilities and the newer trend towards full educational integration for them.

Counting what certain professionals see may, therefore, show the results of social changes rather then the result of an increase in rates of incidence.

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 


I'm not sure why the UK still use the thimerosol containing one (although not there's no strong evidence thimerosol is harmful, most people say it was removed to placate scared parents), but I wanted to point out that in the UK HepB is not a routine vaccine. It's only given to infants at high risk of contracting HepB (if mothers test positive for example).

Good (I am not sure you think it is good - but I do, lol).

[Rrrrrachel]

The risk for hep b in the uk is different than the risk in the us.

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by MeepyCat 


One reason why teachers and librarians see more autism now then they used to is the trend away from institutionalizing individuals with these disabilities and the newer trend towards full educational integration for them.
Counting what certain professionals see may, therefore, show the results of social changes rather then the result of an increase in rates of incidence.

That is a good point.

None-the-less I firmly believe real rates of autism are increasing from numerous readings (primarily of mainstream sources ) I have done.  

When someone firmly insists (not saying you did this) that real rates of autism are not increasing and that it is all just better/shifting diagnosis and awareness, I tend to see one of two things going on:

1.  Their studies and articles are from a number of years in the past.  This idea was in vogue a number of years ago, and while some still cling to it, new research is showing there probably is an environmental component to autism.  Here is one article :  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/health/research/05autism.html?_r=0

2.  Ardent pro-vaxxers might tend to minimise the possibility there might be environmental factors that contribute to autism - because them we would have to look at environmental causes, and g-d forbid we look at vaccines….

Edited by kathymuggle - 11/25/12 at 3:54pm

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

The risk for hep b in the uk is different than the risk in the us.

Or…they are just not as vaccine gung-ho.

The USA has the highest vaccination rate in the world.  I doubt this always reflects your higher risk issues, and most likely reflects an American (and Canadian, sadly, as well) pharmaceutical world view.

[Rrrrrachel]

My comment was limited to hep b.

While I personally agree that at least some of the rise in autism is a true rise due to environmental causes, in addition to a very significant increase in diagnosis and detection and expanded definitions, I think the science on the matter is far from settled and there's still a lot of dispute. It's also a long way from "the cause is environmental" to "the cause must be vaccines."

[Chicharronita]

Originally Posted by Taximom5 

Ask any teacher.  Every teacher my kids have had, in 6 different schools including preschools, have said the same thing:  they never saw the number of kids with autism spectrum disorder when they first started teaching. They saw maybe 1-3 kids that had such issues in the whole grade back in the 1980's.  According to the teachers, most of those kids did not have official diagnoses.

Nowadays, it's 3-5 kids per classroom--some diagnosed, some not. (I know many parents of children with autistic spectrum disorders who refuse an official diagnosis so that the kid doesn't get "labeled;"  they opt for a label of "gifted" instead, which still allows for an IEP.)

Ask any principal who has worked in schools for 20 years or more,--they are very nervous about the number of kids with moderate to severe autism in the public school classrooms, as that affects the school's performance on standardized tests.  They, too, will tell you that they never saw anything like this at the beginning of their careers.

An acquaintance of mine who is a physical therapist says there's so many autistic kids now that she specializes in them. I think she graduated in the 90s, and while she was in college she thought she would be working exclusively with adults after graduation.

But now there are so many autistic kids that she can comfortably support herself. And she doesn't vaccinate after hearing the hair-raising stories that the parents tell her.  :(

[MeepyCat]

Originally Posted by Chicharronita 

An acquaintance of mine who is a physical therapist says there's so many autistic kids now that she specializes in them. I think she graduated in the 90s, and while she was in college she thought she would be working exclusively with adults after graduation.

But now there are so many autistic kids that she can comfortably support herself. And she doesn't vaccinate after hearing the hair-raising stories that the parents tell her.  

One of the things I've been trying to get at here is what constitutes evidence of an increase in rates of autism. More autistic children in public schools and generally visible in public isn't evidence, because of other social changes. A friend of yours having a different career than she envisioned when she graduated is also not evidence - there have been professionals making comfortable livings off working with autistic children for a lot longer then twenty years.

There may well be a genuine increase in rates of autism, but these anecdotes are not evidence of it.

Principals in the school system I live in speak very positively of integrating children with autism and other disabilities into mainstream classrooms. They argue that the strategies required for integration have benefited all the students. I hesitate to say that this lack of universal professional anxiety is evidence that autism isn't increasing - they're response may be affected by features of inner city school systems (students with disabilities may be a comparatively easy problem for them to deal with, given other things that impact some individual students or the student body as a whole). I do want to point out though that "ask any principal" will have more than one result.

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by MeepyCat 

There may well be a genuine increase in rates of autism, but these anecdotes are not evidence of it.
 

Anecdotes can be useful.  If we talk to a group of very elderly people and they remember polio cases, and say they see little or no Polio now - we believe them. 

For some reason, me (and others) saying we saw no autism as a child/young adult and see a fair bit now…well, that is just better awareness, they are out in public more (which is partly true but absolutely not the whole story…1/88….).

People can certainly read the issue for themselves - there is a lot out there on if the rise in autism rate is real or not.  I would suggest anyone looking at the evidence questions whether or not the researchers or authors have any biases that might inform their position.  

[Rrrrrachel]

Anecdotes, in this context, can be useful but they aren't evidence. There's any reason why a particular person would encounter (or even think they encounter) a greater rate of whatever, including various biases. That's why studies that rely on recollection use structured interviews or other systematic ways of gathering the data.

The face of special education has changed radically in this country since the 1980s with the implementation of things like IDEA and NCLB. Schools are serving students in ways they never had to before. There are LOTS of reasons for that! There're also a lot of incentives for getting kids diagnosed that their didn't used to be. There are many factors at work.

[Chicharronita]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle 

Anecdotes can be useful.  If we talk to a group of very elderly people and they remember polio cases, and say they see little or no Polio now - we believe them. 

Yes they can be useful, although now instead of getting polio or measles, kids have asthma, allergies, eczema, etc. etc. that I guess I'll be telling people about when I'm old.

[Rrrrrachel]

There's no evidence that's caused by vaccines.

[chickabiddy]

And even so, I think I'd take eczema over polio (and I have very rashy skin, so I know how unpleasant it can be).

I don't think any of us, or at least not most of us, are arguing that vaccines pose NO risk.  We are arguing that on the whole, the benefits outweigh the risks.

[Taximom5]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

There's no evidence that's caused by vaccines.

You seem to have forgotten that we've been through this before, and several links were posted providing evidence that those diseases HAVE been caused by vaccines.

Vaccine-induced asthma: http://www.smartvax.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69

Vaccine-induced allergies: http://www.smartvax.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=73

Vaccine-induced skin rashes:  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19364042 "There has recently been an increasing incidence of skin tuberculosis-like lesions as adverse reactions of infants in Japan due to BCG vaccination. "

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1778599/ Skin Rashes After Triple Vaccination

You can also look up things like vaccine-induced seizure disorder, vaccine-induced brain damage, vaccine-induced autoimmune disorders, vaccine-induced lupus, vaccine-induced MS, vaccine-induced rheumatoid arthritis, etc.

Many of us have been posting for months that vaccines have caused these disorders. Those who have studied this are calling for, at the very least,  further studies.  And isn't it interesting how many of these disorders just happen to be linked with autism??

Meanwhile, the pharmaceutical industry simply insists that vaccines are safe and that everyone should be vaccinated.  They've even gotten the health insurance companies to pay for it.

[prosciencemum]

"Meanwhile, the pharmaceutical industry simply insists that vaccines are safe and that everyone should be vaccinated.  They've even gotten the health insurance companies to pay for it."

That'd be be because (as many have also posted on before) the vast majority of studies find that vaccine reactions are rare and usually mild.

Yes of course vaccine reactions occur. Nothing is 100% safe. Taxi - I am very sad for you that your child had what hou believe is a major vaccine reaction. I would not wish that on anyone.

Vaccines do no work like magic miracle dust either - but they demonstrably have saved millions of children from dying of vaccine preventable diseases, and countless more for suffering unneccessarilly. I also don't wish that pain on anyone either.

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

Vaccines do no work like magic miracle dust either - but they demonstrably have saved millions of children from dying of vaccine preventable diseases, and countless more for suffering unneccessarilly. I also don't wish that pain on anyone either.

That may be true, but it does not really matter for the purposes of parental decisions.  

What matters is "What is safer for my child - to vaccinate or not vaccinate - given when and where I live, as well as any personal risk factors?"

Edited by kathymuggle - 11/30/12 at 9:42am

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

There's no evidence that's caused by vaccines.

Nor is there any evidence to state definitively that they are NOT

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

"Meanwhile, the pharmaceutical industry simply insists that vaccines are safe and that everyone should be vaccinated.  They've even gotten the health insurance companies to pay for it."
That'd be be because (as many have also posted on before) the vast majority of studies find that vaccine reactions are rare and usually mild.
Yes of course vaccine reactions occur. Nothing is 100% safe. Taxi - I am very sad for you that your child had what hou believe is a major vaccine reaction. I would not wish that on anyone.
Vaccines do no work like magic miracle dust either - but they demonstrably have saved millions of children from dying of vaccine preventable diseases, and countless more for suffering unneccessarilly. I also don't wish that pain on anyone either.

This is the kind of comment that enrages me and I don't even have a vaccine injured child. Translation: Yes Taxi - you believe that your child suffered a major reaction, but in reality, you have no proof, it could very well be a coincidence and you are likely looking for something to blame (and who can blame you for that!) .