Safety of Infant Vaccine Schedule Affirmed - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 38 Old 05-25-2010, 10:47 AM - Thread Starter
 
littlec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 274
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/Vaccines/20249

Thoughts? I find the title quite misleading, even if the study is accurate- just because there may be no neurological delays certainly doesn't affirm "safety" of the vaccines.
Also, am I reading it right that Smith and Woods receives funding from vaccine manufacturers?

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." ~Mark Twain

 


 
littlec is online now  
#2 of 38 Old 05-25-2010, 10:50 AM
 
Pariah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: My happy place.
Posts: 2,797
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlec View Post
Also, am I reading it right that Smith and Woods receives funding from vaccine manufacturers?
That's what it looks like to me...either they or their colleagues running the studies have.

stillheart.gif = Pariah, Super Mom + The Amazing Wiggy (1/06)superhero.gifangel.gif  (6/08)  52 Projects: 0/52  Decluttering Challenge: 37/2013

Pariah is offline  
#3 of 38 Old 05-25-2010, 11:06 AM
 
Fyrestorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 4,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
In this study, children on the spectrum were exluded.
From the abstract
Quote:
Finally, our analyses were limited to publicly available data from the original study. Future VSD studies without this restriction would be able to assess a wider range of outcomes. These include putative vaccine adverse effects such as neurodevelopmental delay, autism, and autoimmune disorders.
So these things were not studied, so, it proves NOTHING - It's all spin

Victim of Birth Rape & Coerced ribboncesarean.gifUnnecesareanribboncesarean.gif What makes people think they can cut up someone else's genitals? nocirc.gif
Fyrestorm is offline  
#4 of 38 Old 05-25-2010, 11:38 AM
 
ASusan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,913
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I read the study quickly last night.

Two words: Bonferroni adjustment.

DS, 10/07. Allergies: peanut, egg, wheat. We've added dairy back in. And taken it back out again. It causes sandpaper skin with itchy patches and thrashing during sleep. Due w/ #2 late April, 2012.

ASusan is offline  
#5 of 38 Old 05-25-2010, 12:25 PM
 
Sileree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 1,079
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I read it and I think Hilary Butler said it best: It was an answer searching for a method.

intactivist.gif  ribbonpb.gif RN student, bellycast.gif birth doula since 2006
Sileree is offline  
#6 of 38 Old 05-25-2010, 03:55 PM
 
heathergirl67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 461
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fyrestorm View Post
In this study, children on the spectrum were exluded.
From the abstract


So these things were not studied, so, it proves NOTHING - It's all spin
It was looking to see whether there was a neurological difference between full vaxed and selective/delayed vaxed. That was merely a suggestion for further studies. Just because it doesn't prove EVERYTHING doesn't mean that it proved NOTHING.
heathergirl67 is offline  
#7 of 38 Old 05-25-2010, 03:57 PM
 
heathergirl67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 461
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASusan View Post
I read the study quickly last night.

Two words: Bonferroni adjustment.
I googled Bonferroni adjustment. I still don't get it. What's sad is that it's probably something kids learn in high school and I'm sitting here like
heathergirl67 is offline  
#8 of 38 Old 05-25-2010, 04:17 PM
 
Fyrestorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 4,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heathergirl67 View Post
It was looking to see whether there was a neurological difference between full vaxed and selective/delayed vaxed. That was merely a suggestion for further studies. Just because it doesn't prove EVERYTHING doesn't mean that it proved NOTHING.

It doesn't prove what they are trying to spin that it proves

Victim of Birth Rape & Coerced ribboncesarean.gifUnnecesareanribboncesarean.gif What makes people think they can cut up someone else's genitals? nocirc.gif
Fyrestorm is offline  
#9 of 38 Old 05-25-2010, 04:23 PM
 
ASusan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,913
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heathergirl67 View Post
I googled Bonferroni adjustment. I still don't get it. What's sad is that it's probably something kids learn in high school and I'm sitting here like
No, sorry. It's a statistical term that one would not learn until, probably, a college-level stats class.

Basically, it means that when you run a lot of tests (like the 42+ they ran), you have to adjust the p-value to account for that. The p-value is typically set at .05, which means that for something (a difference between the 2 groups) to be accepted as statistically significant, the probability of that difference being due to chance is less than 5 in 100. Well, if you run 42+ tests, SOMEthing will come up significant, just because you've run that many tests. (and, with a p-value of .05, 5 tests out of 100 would come up significant, just due to chance). So, a Bonferroni adjustment, you divide the p-value by the number of tests you run.

.05/42 = .0011

None of their results would be significant if they had done a Bonferroni adjustment.

A good peer review should have stopped that paper right there. We make our undergraduate honors candidates use Bonferroni adjustments when they run more than 4 or 5 tests!

Although one might argue that it would still be publishable withOUT finding any differences between the lesser vaxed group and the most vaxed group, as this is the type of finding that the CDC would use as "evidence" that vaccines are "safe."

As the study stands now, the 2 groups - lesser-vaxed and more vaxed - were different on SES and mother's education (favoring the more vaxed group), and the differences on the neuropsy tests that favored the vaxed group all but disappeared when they statistically accounted for SES and income. The ONE difference that is left is the one they should not have accepted had they done a Bonferroni adjustment.

HOWEVER, the fact that the lesser-vaxed group had lower SES and lower mother's education means that it is NOT a good comparison group to the lesser-vaxed children of today. (not sure whether someone may have already said this up-thread)

DS, 10/07. Allergies: peanut, egg, wheat. We've added dairy back in. And taken it back out again. It causes sandpaper skin with itchy patches and thrashing during sleep. Due w/ #2 late April, 2012.

ASusan is offline  
#10 of 38 Old 05-25-2010, 04:26 PM
 
ASusan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,913
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sileree View Post
I read it and I think Hilary Butler said it best: It was an answer searching for a method.
love this

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fyrestorm View Post
It doesn't prove what they are trying to spin that it proves
The headlines about this study are spinning it in the very direction that the CDC is probably very happy about.

ETA - and the majority of the lesser-vaxed group received all the scheduled vaxes by 12 months of age, they just didn't get them all in the first 6 months.

The lesser-vaxed group had 6 or fewer vaxes in the first 6 months of life. The on-time vaxed group had 7 or more vaxes in their first 6 mos.

DS, 10/07. Allergies: peanut, egg, wheat. We've added dairy back in. And taken it back out again. It causes sandpaper skin with itchy patches and thrashing during sleep. Due w/ #2 late April, 2012.

ASusan is offline  
#11 of 38 Old 05-25-2010, 11:39 PM
 
mambera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASusan View Post
None of their results would be significant if they had done a Bonferroni adjustment.
I think that's their point, yes? No difference between the early-full-vax and delayed-vax groups.

Quote:
Although one might argue that it would still be publishable withOUT finding any differences between the lesser vaxed group and the most vaxed group, as this is the type of finding that the CDC would use as "evidence" that vaccines are "safe."
Right. They didn't even bother discussing the two measures in which full-vax outperformed delayed-vax (NEPSY speeded naming and WAIS) in their conclusions section, because the effect is small, probably a statistical burp, and not central to the authors' point, which is no *adverse neurological outcomes* associated with early full vax.

I'm curious as to why you say this study doesn't count as evidence?

Quote:
HOWEVER, the fact that the lesser-vaxed group had lower SES and lower mother's education means that it is NOT a good comparison group to the lesser-vaxed children of today. (not sure whether someone may have already said this up-thread)
But they adjusted for SES, etc... so their results don't depend on that. I'm not clear on the concern here.

Me, DH, DD1 (5/2009) and DD2 (10/2011).
I'm not crunchy. I'm evidence-based.

Vaccines save lives.

mambera is offline  
#12 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 01:05 AM
 
emma1325's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fyrestorm View Post
In this study, children on the spectrum were exluded.
From the abstract


So these things were not studied, so, it proves NOTHING - It's all spin


I looked, and cannot find where you pulled your quote from. Can you please link me, if possible?

Loving mother, Devoted Wife
emma1325 is offline  
#13 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 01:29 AM
 
Katerz2u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 644
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by emma1325 View Post
I looked, and cannot find where you pulled your quote from. Can you please link me, if possible?
http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ds.2009-2489v1
page 8, center column, towards the bottom.
Katerz2u is offline  
#14 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 01:31 AM
 
Jugs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So... infants vaccinated over a decade ago, on a different schedule, is relevant how?


 

 

Jugs is offline  
#15 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 01:52 AM
 
emma1325's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katerz2u View Post
http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ds.2009-2489v1
page 8, center column, towards the bottom.
Thanks!!

Loving mother, Devoted Wife
emma1325 is offline  
#16 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 03:02 AM
 
heathergirl67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 461
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jugs View Post
So... infants vaccinated over a decade ago, on a different schedule, is relevant how?
Because they're still part of the current vax recommendations. So if people are worried about vaxes causing neurological disorders they can cross these off their lists. Much fewer to investigate. And it's over a decade ago because they're trying to look at the long(er) term results. Most people want to see more vax studies include long-term results.
heathergirl67 is offline  
#17 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 09:50 AM
 
caned & able's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bridgeport, ME
Posts: 999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heathergirl67 View Post
Because they're still part of the current vax recommendations. So if people are worried about vaxes causing neurological disorders they can cross these off their lists. Much fewer to investigate. And it's over a decade ago because they're trying to look at the long(er) term results. Most people want to see more vax studies include long-term results.
And according to media doctor Dean Edell, an ophthamologist, those studies will never be done, because they take too long.

He has said that for the past 30 years and I suppose he is right.
caned & able is offline  
#18 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 09:52 AM
 
mamadelbosque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,946
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
But... they didn't compare vax to unvaxed, they compared tons of vaxes to slightly less vaxes... Not that big of a difference, so... whats the point?

Coures, thats been my issue with most/all vax 'safety studies' the whole time: they never compare vax to a TRUE placebo (saline), the compare one vax to another vax!!
mamadelbosque is offline  
#19 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 09:59 AM
 
caned & able's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bridgeport, ME
Posts: 999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamadelbosque View Post
But... they didn't compare vax to unvaxed, they compared tons of vaxes to slightly less vaxes... Not that big of a difference, so... whats the point?

Coures, thats been my issue with most/all vax 'safety studies' the whole time: they never compare vax to a TRUE placebo (saline), the compare one vax to another vax!!
All vaccine studies are like that. Don't be so surprised. Vaccine manufacturers do not want any studies to be done to compare vaxed and nonvaxed. Too risky for the old bottom line!
caned & able is offline  
#20 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 10:56 AM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,058
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by caned & able View Post
And according to media doctor Dean Edell, an ophthamologist, those studies will never be done, because they take too long.

He has said that for the past 30 years and I suppose he is right.
You're kidding, right? In the past 30 years, they could have been conducting a well-designed longitudinal study.... Wow.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
#21 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 10:57 AM
 
Jugs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by heathergirl67 View Post
Because they're still part of the current vax recommendations. So if people are worried about vaxes causing neurological disorders they can cross these off their lists. Much fewer to investigate. And it's over a decade ago because they're trying to look at the long(er) term results. Most people want to see more vax studies include long-term results.
Right, but they are comparing vaccinated vs. vaccinated, and handpicked which neurodevelopmental outcomes were to be compared. As pointed out by pp, they did not include those with neurological disorders, particularly those with possibly vaccine-related neurological disorders.


 

 

Jugs is offline  
#22 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 11:02 AM
 
ASusan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,913
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mambera View Post
I think that's their point, yes? No difference between the early-full-vax and delayed-vax groups.
Yes, that was their point

Quote:
Right. They didn't even bother discussing the two measures in which full-vax outperformed delayed-vax (NEPSY speeded naming and WAIS) in their conclusions section, because the effect is small, probably a statistical burp, and not central to the authors' point, which is no *adverse neurological outcomes* associated with early full vax.

I'm curious as to why you say this study doesn't count as evidence?



But they adjusted for SES, etc... so their results don't depend on that. I'm not clear on the concern here.
The study doesn't count as evidence of vaccine safety. It is evidence that lesser-but-still-fully-vaxed-as-infants perform the same as vaxed-according-to-schedule infants on cogntive and psychomotor tests.

I like it. It makes me a little more comfortable. But it's not evidence of vaccine safety.

DS, 10/07. Allergies: peanut, egg, wheat. We've added dairy back in. And taken it back out again. It causes sandpaper skin with itchy patches and thrashing during sleep. Due w/ #2 late April, 2012.

ASusan is offline  
#23 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 02:20 PM
 
heathergirl67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 461
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASusan View Post
Yes, that was their point



The study doesn't count as evidence of vaccine safety. It is evidence that lesser-but-still-fully-vaxed-as-infants perform the same as vaxed-according-to-schedule infants on cogntive and psychomotor tests.

I like it. It makes me a little more comfortable. But it's not evidence of vaccine safety.
I agree. Maybe the scope wasn't as broad as some people would have liked. And of course it doesn't prove the safety of vaxes in every area. But it does answer some questions. Especially for those who were wondering about vaxing on schedule versus delaying/selective vaxing. Not as much help for those who were wondering about no vaxing vs vaxing on schedule. Or no vaxing vs selective/delayed vaxing. But I guess they can't do a study that includes every possible situation and outcome. I think it will just be pieces at a time.
heathergirl67 is offline  
#24 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 03:07 PM
 
KorbanJ08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: California
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jugs View Post
Right, but they are comparing vaccinated vs. vaccinated, and handpicked which neurodevelopmental outcomes were to be compared. As pointed out by pp, they did not include those with neurological disorders, particularly those with possibly vaccine-related neurological disorders.


I think it was already mentioned, but the data they used is the same data they used to disprove thermisol has any effect on children/babies and does not cause autism. I actually had to find the full report on PDF, to see the true numbers. And we all know that study excluded any children who had a neurological disorder whether vaccine related or not. They are using the same slanted and questionable data, with a new twist.

It's increasingly difficult to believe these "studies", they assume if you don't have a medical degree your to stupid to understand the data and should keep your mouth shut and offer over your child's arm. I CAN understand, and I think they have made a good case when it comes to shots causing autism, that is not my main concern any longer.

But, you can't use the autism study to convince me that 40 shots by one years old has no neurological, physiological, biological and emotional consequences. Thats not what the original data was for, is it that hard to comapre non-vax to vax kids.

Mama to a baby boy

Mama to a crazy preschooler!nocirc.gifdelayedvax.gifselectivevax.gifhomeschool.gif

KorbanJ08 is offline  
#25 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 08:02 PM
 
Sileree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 1,079
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Sileree is offline  
#26 of 38 Old 05-26-2010, 09:23 PM
 
caned & able's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bridgeport, ME
Posts: 999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post
You're kidding, right? In the past 30 years, they could have been conducting a well-designed longitudinal study.... Wow.
...and according to Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, doctors do not want to deprive any child of the benefits of vaccination, so yes, that study will NEVER be done.
caned & able is offline  
#27 of 38 Old 05-28-2010, 12:27 AM
 
mamadelbosque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,946
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Oh, I know thats how they do it. I'm just saying its stupid, and very bad science. I would love to see a true, double-blind, TRUE placebo (saline vs vax) controlled vax study, but I know it'll never happen. But, thats what I'd have to see in order to vax. Untill you show me a *REAL* safety study, theres no way I'm injecting my kid with something. We don't let them get away w/ not doing real placebo-based studies for any other medication, so why do they get away w/ it when it comes to vaccines??
mamadelbosque is offline  
#28 of 38 Old 05-28-2010, 01:20 AM
 
ma2two's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
This study is extremely misleading, and I can't explain it better than Ginger Taylor of Adventures in Autism, so I'll just link to her blog post, titled, "Thomas Maugh Can't Read." http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/
ma2two is offline  
#29 of 38 Old 05-28-2010, 02:27 AM
 
caned & able's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bridgeport, ME
Posts: 999
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamadelbosque View Post
Oh, I know thats how they do it. I'm just saying its stupid, and very bad science. I would love to see a true, double-blind, TRUE placebo (saline vs vax) controlled vax study, but I know it'll never happen. But, thats what I'd have to see in order to vax. Untill you show me a *REAL* safety study, theres no way I'm injecting my kid with something. We don't let them get away w/ not doing real placebo-based studies for any other medication, so why do they get away w/ it when it comes to vaccines??
Another reason (excuse) for not doing a double blind study between vaxed and unvaxed persons is that an immune response cannot be faked.

MMMM, O.K. Whatever.
caned & able is offline  
#30 of 38 Old 05-28-2010, 09:01 AM
 
an_domhan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 212
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamadelbosque View Post
I would love to see a true, double-blind, TRUE placebo (saline vs vax) controlled vax study, but I know it'll never happen.
There's no conceivable reason that they can't do this in an animal model, but the last time I said that to a skeptic they told me I couldn't extrapolate the data to humans. We do it all the time... otherwise no drugs would enter the marketplace.
an_domhan is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off