CNN: US Autism Rate Surges--AGAIN - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-27-2014, 12:22 PM - Thread Starter
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/03/27/u-s-autism-rate-surges-cdc-reports/

 

"The number of U.S. children with autism has surged to one in 68, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Thursday, a 30 percent increase since the agency estimated just two years ago that one child in 88 suffered from the disorder.

The new estimate, based on a review of records in 2010 for eight year olds in 11 states, also showed a marked increase in the number of children with higher IQs who fall somewhere on the autism spectrum, and a wide range of results depending on where a child lives. Only one child in 175 was diagnosed with autism in Alabama, while one in 45 was found to have the disorder in New Jersey."

Hm, New Jersey, home of the pharmaceutical manufacturers, where all children must be fully vaccinated, including flu shots, to attend day care and school, where the only vaccine exemptions are medical and religious (ONLY if vaccination violates a bona fide religious tenet)...

Taximom5 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 03-27-2014, 12:28 PM
 
ma2two's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

New Jersey is also one of the most polluted states, I think.

 

If they continue to claim it is genetic, I'd like to know what is so different genetically about people in New Jersey vs. Alabama.

ma2two is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 12:36 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)

The fact that it ranges from 1 in 45 from one state to 1 in 175 in another is pretty good evidence that this range has nothing to do with vaccines.  

 

Surely you don't think childhood vaccine rates are THAT drastically different from NJ to Alabama?  If they are, I'd like some official stats to support it. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 12:42 PM
 
ma2two's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

The fact that it ranges from 1 in 45 from one state to 1 in 175 in another is pretty good evidence that this has nothing to do with vaccines.  

 

Surely you don't think childhood vaccine rates are THAT drastically different from NJ to Alabama?  If they are, I'd like some official stats to support it. 

 

Really? "Nothing to do with vaccines?" How about it's pretty good evidence that vaccines are not the only factor.

ma2two is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 12:50 PM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 18,400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)

Where are all those adult autistics?

The fact that the number changes from one state to another may depend on variables as reporting, diagnosing, and funding for special needs programs, not actual real cases.

 

I thought there was a new criteria for diagnosing autism in the new and improved DSM that would eliminate lots of these.

 

I have been working with children for a long time, and autism was not even on the horizon when I started caring for little ones. Oh, yes, better diagnosis, DSM, etc. Thanks. Got it.


"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic."
applejuice is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 12:56 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ma2two View Post
 

 

Really? "Nothing to do with vaccines?" How about it's pretty good evidence that vaccines are not the only factor.

 

What is the vaccine coverage for NJ vs Alabama?  I'm guessing it's not that different.  So there has to be another explanation.  Either one state is better at diagnosing/reporting autism than the other, or one has some environmental impact that the other one doesn't, or in greater quantity.  My guess is most likely some kind of combination of the two. 

 

I don't think I've heard anyone say it is 100% genetic.  Identical twin studies have ruled that out pretty conclusively.  There is a very strong genetic component, but also some level of an environmental one.  Recent studies show that environmental component probably happens in utero. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 01:16 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)

Additionally, have vaccine rates gone up by 30% in the last two years?   No. 

 

So you have to concede that something else is contributing to these numbers.  Better reporting etc. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 01:19 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)

"The fact that the number changes from one state to another may depend on variables as reporting, diagnosing, and funding for special needs programs, not actual real cases." 

 

Ding Ding! 

 

That's also a big reason why the autism numbers are so much higher today than they were 20-30 years ago.   Better reporting/diagnosing etc. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 01:25 PM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 18,400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)

I think you know I mean to explain the difference between the currently reported cases between states, not between generations.

So where are those autistic adults we need to study to decide how to handle these new cases?


"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic."
applejuice is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 01:30 PM
 
samaxtics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 666
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)

Here is something to consider. In Canda some provinces offer better supports for autism than others.  We moved to our current province for that reason.  

My child was vaccinated in one state (NY) and one province but receives autism services in another province.  Lots of parents have moved/are moving here for the services.  It would be easy to look at the numbers and say this province has so many children receiving services but the vaccine schedule is the same as the ROC therefore vaccines have no role.  


"Practically every food you buy in a store for consumption by humans is genetically modified food"
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Astrophysicist/GMO defender
samaxtics is online now  
Old 03-27-2014, 01:35 PM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 18,400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
 A scientist told him about the changes in diagnostic criteria, but “I knew that that was not true, because I spent my life working with people with intellectual disabilities. My family started the Special Olympics. I worked at Camp Shriver from when I was 8 years old. … I saw every kind of mental disability, but I had never seen autistic. I didn’t know what autism was until I saw Rain Man.”

Neither did many people. "Rain Man" was released in Dec 1988. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095953/

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2013/06/robert_f_kennedy_jr_vaccine_conspiracy_theory_scientists_and_journalists.html

 

RFK Jr is 60 yrs old.

 

I personally heard of autism in a psychology class 40+ years ago, but was told it was very rare, 1/10000. Little progress has been made in these many years; and I suspect that is because there is much suppression of valid research and information.  With all of the $ spent on research, why has there not been any progress in this area? I suspect finding the answer is not profitable. Treating, diagnosing, counseling, and research are profitable.  


"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic."
applejuice is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 01:45 PM - Thread Starter
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

What is the vaccine coverage for NJ vs Alabama?  I'm guessing it's not that different.  So there has to be another explanation.  

 

Well, that's very unscientific, going from "I'm guessing" to "there has to be another explanation."

What IS the vaccine coverage in Alabama?  It's a far more rural area than New Jersey.  Is it possible that well-child check-ups are missed more often in the first year or two than they are in New Jersey?

 

And what else might be different environmentally?  Could it be something that interacts somehow with either vaccines or vaccine after-effects in the immune system?

See how important things can be missed if we prematurely dismiss a possible factor?

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 01:51 PM - Thread Starter
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

That's also a big reason why the autism numbers are so much higher today than they were 20-30 years ago.   Better reporting/diagnosing etc. 

 

But diagnosing and reporting have not changed in the last 2 years.  In fact, they haven't changed in the last 10-15 years.  The diagnostic criteria did not change between 1994 (DSM IV) and 2013 (DSM V).

 

ASK THE TEACHERS. ASK THE SPEECH THERAPISTS.  ASK THE OCCUPATIONAL THERAPISTS.


None of them worked with this many "special needs" students 20-30 years ago--and it's not like we have a bunch of empty institutions that USED to have autistic-people-misdiagnosed-with-something-else-and-are-now-empty.

The number of students affected with Asperger's to the point where they need assistance in school has drastically increased.


The number of children affected with profound, non-verbal autism has drastically increased.

The number of children diagnosed as "mentally challenged" (used to be called mental retardation) has NOT drastically decreased.

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 01:52 PM - Thread Starter
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by samaxtics View Post
 

Here is something to consider. In Canda some provinces offer better supports for autism than others.  We moved to our current province for that reason.  

My child was vaccinated in one state (NY) and one province but receives autism services in another province.  Lots of parents have moved/are moving here for the services.  It would be easy to look at the numbers and say this province has so many children receiving services but the vaccine schedule is the same as the ROC therefore vaccines have no role.  

 

That is an excellent point.

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 01:58 PM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 18,400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)

Yes, that was my point in #5, but you made the much point clearer. Thank you.


"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic."
applejuice is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 01:59 PM - Thread Starter
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

Additionally, have vaccine rates gone up by 30% in the last two years?   No. 

 

So you have to concede that something else is contributing to these numbers.  Better reporting etc. 

 

It is very unscientific to assume that the vaccine rate must go up by 30% in order to be linked to a 30% increase in autism.  The rate of peanut allergy tripled from 1997 to 2008, but you don't see anyone assuming that children must be eating triple the amount of peanut butter.


"Conceding" that something else is contributing to the numbers based on a logical fallacy is the kind of thing that keeps us from learning whatever is really going on.

 

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 02:18 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

 

It is very unscientific to assume that the vaccine rate must go up by 30% in order to be linked to a 30% increase in autism.  The rate of peanut allergy tripled from 1997 to 2008, but you don't see anyone assuming that children must be eating triple the amount of peanut butter.


"Conceding" that something else is contributing to the numbers based on a logical fallacy is the kind of thing that keeps us from learning whatever is really going on.

 

 

Interesting.  JAMA disagrees.   See this study (http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=193604

 

They "looked at the number of autism cases in California from 1980 to 1994. They also looked at the rate of MMR vaccination over the same time period. Here is what they found:

 

 

 

 

 

Notice that there is no correlation between the number of autism cases and the vaccination rate. The vaccination rate of those at or under the age of 17 months increased by roughly 50% over the period, while the number of autism cases increased by 600%. Also, if you look at the date range of 1988 to 1994, you will see that the vaccination rate of those at or under the age of 17 months barely changed at all, while the number of autism cases increased by 300%. The data are even more striking for the vaccination rate of those at or under the age of 24 months. That vaccination rate barely changed over the entire time period, but the number of autism cases increased by 600%." 

 

The study concluded "Results Essentially no correlation was observed between the secular trend of early childhood MMR immunization rates in California and the secular trend in numbers of children with autism enrolled in California's regional service center system.

 

Conclusions These data do not suggest an association between MMR immunization among young children and an increase in autism occurrence." 

 

If you say that roller blading is causing the rise in peanut allergies, and then say "Look! the rate of peanut allergies has gone up 30 percent in two years! It has to be the rollerblading!"  The next logical question is : Well, did the rate of roller blading also go up by 30 percent? Or did it stay the same?  Or only go up a little?  If roller blading rates stayed the same or barely moved, yet peanut allergies still continued to rise, then something else has to explain it. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 02:30 PM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 18,400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)

What a ridiculous statement. What would be the causation factor between peanut allergies and rollerblading? You are grasping at straws.


"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic."
applejuice is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 02:32 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,610
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)

And here is what you find when you look at the number of thimerosal containing vaccines and autism rates in California

 


t
 
"There are only two mistakes you can make in the search for the Truth. Not starting, and not going all the way." ~ Mark Passio
Mirzam is online now  
Old 03-27-2014, 02:34 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by applejuice View Post
 

What a ridiculous statement. What would be the causation factor between peanut allergies and rollerblading? You are grasping at straws.

 

I was just picking two things at random.  Call rollerblading X peanut allergies Y, it doesn't matter.  The point still stands. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 02:34 PM - Thread Starter
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)

That's very interesting, except it doesn't list the percentage of children who received the MMR at 12-15 months, which is what was recommended in the 1990s.  It also doesn't show the percentage of children who received a birth dose of Hep B vaccine, which was begun around 1988, and universally recommended in 1991.

 

See, again, you're missing the possibility of a cumulative causal association.

 

People who have allergic reactions to penicillin generally have their first symptom on the 10th day of taking the medication.  If you assume that, because they've had one dose and not reacted, you can rule out an allergy, you would be wrong.


Same in the case of vaccines.  We don't know whether the birth dose of hep B vaccine somehow sets the stage for a later autoimmune/neurological reaction.  WE DON'T KNOW.  So we can't rule it out.

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 02:35 PM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 18,400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post

 

I was just picking two things at random.  Call them X and Y, it doesn't matter.  The point still stands. 

You point stands on straws.


"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic."
applejuice is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 02:47 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)

Yes, I am completely aware that for some people no amount of evidence will ever convince them that vaccines/MMR do not cause autism. 

 

But saying that X has risen by 30% while Y hasn't, therefore Y cannot possibly explain the rise in X is not a logical fallacy.  It means there is little to no correlation between X and Y. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 03:07 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Mirzam - can you provide the reference for that graph? I'd like to dig into it a bit more.

Any idea why it ends in 1996? That's almost 20 years ago now!

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 04:02 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,610
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Mirzam - can you provide the reference for that graph? I'd like to dig into it a bit more.

Any idea why it ends in 1996? That's almost 20 years ago now!

http://www.safeminds.org/mercury-autism/vaccines-and-autism/correlation-between-increases-in-autism-prevalence-and-introduction-of-new-vaccines/


t
 
"There are only two mistakes you can make in the search for the Truth. Not starting, and not going all the way." ~ Mark Passio
Mirzam is online now  
Old 03-27-2014, 04:09 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,610
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)

Top Ten Things to Know about the CDC Report of Autism Prevalence


t
 
"There are only two mistakes you can make in the search for the Truth. Not starting, and not going all the way." ~ Mark Passio
Mirzam is online now  
Old 04-07-2014, 02:04 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)

 

Thanks for providing the link. Sadly the article still doesn't say where the data comes from or why it stops in 1996. That for me raises some warning flags. It's always good to try to find primary sources.

 

 So I Googles "california autism rates thimerosol" to see if I could dig up the actual study. 

 

 I found this: http://www.immunizationinfo.org/science/autism-cases-california-after-removal-thimerosal which is a study through 2007 which concludes: 

 

Quote:
If thimerosal in vaccines were a major cause of autism, the prevalence of autism would be predicted to fall as exposure was reduced. These data show no decrease—in fact they show a continued increase—in cases of autism in California since the reduction of thimerosal in pediatric vaccines.

 

It's still not he primary source, but it links it, so I followed the link to the article on JAMA (it's open source so you can read the whole thing): http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=482546

 

That concludes no observable link between thimerosol and autism (like tons of  other studies they say): 

 

Quote:
Our findings are in concordance with the rigorous 2004 review of at least 12 previous published and unpublished studies1225 by the IOM Immunization Safety Committee, which concluded that the body of evidence rejected a causal relationship between TCVs and autism.

 

The article also links to and discussed older work which appeared to show a peak in CA autism in 1994 which concided with when cumulative thimerosol exposure was starting to decline (not that almost not infant vaccines contain thimerosol any more anyway). That sounds like the primary source of Mirzam's graph, but sadly the online link given as a reference (not a journal for some reason) is broken. 

 

It says of the finding: 

 

Quote:
the apparent decline in autism prevalence after 1994 reflected incomplete ascertainment because children born in more recent years had had a briefer opportunity to be reported compared with children born in earlier years. With the availability of subsequent DDS data (Figure 1), the prevalence estimates of autism for children born each year from 1995 to 2003 have since exceeded that for children born in 1994. Consequently, trends in autism prevalence and estimated thimerosal exposure are no longer synchronous.

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
Old 04-07-2014, 10:39 AM - Thread Starter
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

Additionally, have vaccine rates gone up by 30% in the last two years?   No. 

 

So you have to concede that something else is contributing to these numbers.  Better reporting etc. 

 

 

Wait a minute, tea.  You're making a very common mistake in assuming that vaccine rates (or any other environmental factor) for the last two years  (2012 and 2013) have anything to do with the vaccines these children were given between 2000-2004.


If we're comparing the official, CDC-announced autism rates for the years 2012 and 2014, we shouldn't be comparing vaccine schedules for 2012 and 2014.

 

Instead, we should be comparing the vaccine schedules in the first 2 years of life for the kids born in 2000, and for the kids born in 2002.

 

And guess what?  

There WAS a significant increase in the vaccine schedule, according to http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/past.html

 

Babies born in 2002 received the new heptavalent pneumococcal vaccine (PCV) at 2 months, in addition to receiving a second HepB, DTaP, Hib, and IPV.  They received additional doses of PCV at 4, 6, and 12 months, in combination with several other vaccines.  Babies born in 2000 did not receive PCV.


Babies born in the 4th quarter of 2002 would also have started receiving flu shots at age 2 or less, as those were recommended in the second half of 2004 for all infants over 6 months.

Thimerosal-preserved pediatric vaccines continued to be used in the US as late as 2004;  in spite of the new availability of thimerosal-free pediatric vaccines, the vaccine manufacturers were instructed to phase out sales of TPVs in the US;  they were not instructed to stop sales and distribution of previously manufactured TPVs, nor were doctors instructed to stop using them. They continued to be used until their shelf life expired, sometime in 2004.

So the children born in 2002 not only received thimerosal-preserved vaccines, they also received new, additional vaccines that the previous cohort had not received.

It's important to note that, at the time, there was absolutely no data concerning long-term neurodevelopment and autoimmune effects from being given the new vaccines in addition to the previous vaccine schedule.

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 04-12-2014, 10:24 PM - Thread Starter
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)

teacozy, I wanted to make sure you had seen my last post in this thread.  It does seem that the 2001 vaccine schedule increased by roughly 30% (4 new shots) during the first year, corresponding with the 30% increase in autism for children born in 2002.    I was wondering what you make of it, since your point was (mistakenly) that there was no increase in vaccines corresponding with the increase in autism.

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 04-14-2014, 10:16 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

teacozy, I wanted to make sure you had seen my last post in this thread.  It does seem that the 2001 vaccine schedule increased by roughly 30% (4 new shots) during the first year, corresponding with the 30% increase in autism for children born in 2002.    I was wondering what you make of it, since your point was (mistakenly) that there was no increase in vaccines corresponding with the increase in autism.

 

I had initially missed it.  

 

Sorry, have been very busy this weekend. 

 

I have only glanced at it, but when looking at the regular vaccine schedule (ie, not vaccines that are only for certain high risk groups etc) the only difference is the addition of PCV.  It was added to the schedule in 2001, so children born in 2000 would have had at least one dose by the age of 24 months, possibly even 2 or 3 if they were born late in 2000 (since we're going down that road).  Thats not a 30% increase.

 

Here's the 2000 schedule: 

 

 

Once again, I've only glanced at the schedules but it looks like (only looking until 24 months): 

 

Hep B in 2000- 3 doses.

Hep B in 2002-3 doses.

 

DtaP in 2000- 4 doses

DtaP in 2002-4 doses

 

Hib in 2000- 4 doses

Hib in 2002-4 doses

 

IPV in 2000- 3 doses

IPV in 2002-3 doses

 

MMR in 2000- 1 dose

MMR in 2002-1 dose

 

Varicella in 2000- 1 dose

Varicella in 2002-1 dose

 

Even if it did result in a 30% increase, would that mean the new theory is that PCV is the cause of autism?  Because the rest of the schedule is almost exactly the same. 

 

As I have said before, I realize that some people will never be convinced that vaccines do not cause autism, no matter the evidence. 

 

But this issue has been looked at over and over and over.  There is not even a good correlation between the increase of autism and vaccines.  I've posted this before, but for example, the MMR vaccine increase during certain years was very small, while the autism diagnoses rose 300%.  


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not 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