Recent Posts

Vaccine Injury Stories

Science Is Unsettling

Shop

Health News

‘Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism’ is Pseudoscience

Guest Post: Whyser

You know, I wish provaxxers looked critically at their own studies that they believe to prove their own point.

For example, the idea that vaccines are not associated to [insert your favorite adverse reaction here], is currently not strongly supported by any of available science that I’ve seen.

Let’s take the most popular one of all, that ‘vaccines are not associated to autism’.

If you were to try to support that with studies, you’ll likely be linking study after study that shows:

  • MMR is not associated to autism
  • Thimerosal is not associated to autism

 

Like this one: “Vaccines are not associated with autism: An evidence-based meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies”, by Luke E. Taylor, published 2014]

Here’s the problem with those studies in terms of design: you’re comparing a vaccinated population vs. a vaccinated population, but using the MMR as a variable.

As an exaggeration, let’s assume the following vaccination histories of the case and control group:

Case Group
Hep B x 3
DTaP x 4
Hib x 3
Pneumococcal x 3
Polio x 3
Influenza x 1
Varicella x 1
Hep A x 1
MMR x 1

Control Group
Hep B x 3
DTaP x 4
Hib x 3
Pneumococcal x 3
Polio x 3
Influenza x 1
Varicella x 1
Hep A x 1

The only difference being that the case group has been vaccinated for MMR and the control group has not.

When you find that the autism rate between both groups is statistically insignificant, you then conclude that MMR is not associated to autism.

Fair enough, so as long as the PROPER CONTEXT of this conclusion is established, that is, if you’re going to be vaccinating anyways, then the MMR isn’t going to pose any more significant risk.

But for the life of me, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND how people use these studies designed in this manner to conclude that VACCINES are not associated to autism.

You want to attack Exley and Shaw, fine. But if you’re going to do that, you should be just as upset with the multitude of studies that don’t even come CLOSE to answering the question, are vaccines (as a whole) associated to [adverse reaction]?

The vast majority of vaccine safety science is designed similarly to this, so to say that you have science on your side when there are no real studies to support that conclusion shows to me who really believes in pseudoscience.

Here is the 2014 meta-analysis: “Vaccines are not associated with autism: An evidence-based meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies”.

The header image is from that study. This study is supposed to reassure parents. It’s supposed to be the nail in the coffin–‘no stone unturned’, vaccines have been exhaustively and objectively investigated for a relationship to vaccines. And lo and behold, it proves over and over that we have simply failed to do the research.

Here are the tables of studies included in that study that they use to “prove” that “vaccines” do not cause autism. Yet, each and every study only ever looks at MMR or Thimerosal (Hg). How can that be used to explain that ALL VACCINES or ANY VACCINES do not contribute to autism? It doesn’t.

OK, so someone, please tell me how we can draw any conclusions about ALL VACCINES, or ANY vaccines, when we are only looking at ONE vaccine or one ingredient (thimerosal)?

Here’s another study: “Vaccines and Autism: Evidence Does Not Support a Causal Association”  by CDC epidemiologist Frank DeStefano.

The title of the paper uses the word “vaccines”, however the paper only investigates the MMR vaccine and thimerosal, the mercury containing preservative that was used in some vaccines. The conclusion specifically says:

The current scientific evidence does not support a causal association between MMR vaccine or TCVs and autism.

Notice how he doesn’t conclude…”all vaccines,” because it’s literally never been studied.


Vaccine studies routinely lack zero exposed control groups

1. Association Between Estimated Cumulative Vaccine Antigen Exposure Through the First 23 Months of Life and Non–Vaccine Targeted Infections From 24 Through 47 Months of Age, Glanz J, et al. JAMA. 2018; 319(9):906-913. 

Notes: Comparing health outcomes for different ranges of antigen exposure. The lowest antigen exposure reference group is 0-198 antigens.  So, no unvaccinated group. 

Full study here—->Taylor, et al
 
Notes: 5 case-control and 5 cohort studies. Studies were included that looked at either MMR vaccination, cumulative mercury (Hg) or cumulative thimerosal dosage from vaccinations.  No individual study had an unvaccinated control reference group.  

3. Patterns of childhood immunization and all-cause mortalityNatalie L. McCarthy, et al. 2017

Full study here —–> McCarthy, et al

Notes: Study compares mortality rates between children following the ACIP recommended vaccine schedule against children considered “undervaccinated” which are children missing at least one dose. Curiously, 3.3% of the “undervaccinated” group received no vaccines but they are not examined distinctly from the “undervaccinated” group.  So, no unvaccinated reference group. 

4. Prenatal and Infant Exposure to Thimerosal From Vaccines and Immunoglobulins and Risk of Autism. Cristofer S. PriceWilliam W. Thompson, et al. 2010

Notes: This study wanted to examine the relationships between prenatal and infant ethylmercury exposure from thimerosal-containing vaccines and or immunoglobulin preparations and ASD, but it forgot to include unvaccinated kids.  No unvaccinated reference group. 

5. Increasing Exposure to Antibody-Stimulating Proteins and Polysaccharides in Vaccines Is Not Associated with Risk of Autism. DeStefano, et al. 2013.

Notes: They tried to evaluate the association between autism and the level of immunologic stimulation received from vaccines administered during the first 2 years of life, but forgot to keep the ZERO exposure group all by itself in its own cute little section. The reference groups are: 0-25 antigens, 0-125 antigens, and 0-311 antigens. And then for an even more sensitive analysis, their reference group for a single day exposure was 0-25 antigens, 0-25 antigens, and 0-100 antigens (compared to kids with 3000-6258 antigens). Sadly, this was another missed opportunity.  No unvaccinated reference group. 

6. Number of antigens in early childhood vaccines and neuropsychological outcomes at age 7-10 years. Iqbal S, et al. 2013

Full Study —-> Iqbal, et al

Notes: They used a publicly available dataset to evaluate the association between antibody-stimulating proteins and polysaccharides from early childhood vaccines and neuropsychological outcomes at age 7-10 years. Lowest exposure reference group is <100.  So, no unvaccinated group. 

7. On-time Vaccine Receipt in the First Year Does Not Adversely Affect Neuropsychological Outcomes. Michael J. Smith 2010

Full Study —–> Smith, et al

Notes: Comparing timely (within 30 days of recommended schedule) to untimely (children who did not meet that criteria).  There is no unvaccinated group. 

8. Analysis of health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children: Developmental delays, asthma, ear infections and gastrointestinal disorders. Brian S. Hooker, et al. 2020

Notes: This does have an unvaccinated group. This is their findings:

Vaccination before 1 year of age was associated with increased odds of developmental delays (OR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.47–3.24), asthma (OR = 4.49, 95% CI 2.04–9.88) and ear infections (OR = 2.13, 95% CI 1.63–2.78). In a quartile analysis, subjects were grouped by number of vaccine doses received in the first year of life. Higher odds ratios were observed in Quartiles 3 and 4 (where more vaccine doses were received) for all four health conditions considered, as compared to Quartile 1. In a temporal analysis, developmental delays showed a linear increase as the age cut-offs increased from 6 to 12 to 18 to 24 months of age (ORs = 1.95, 2.18, 2.92 and 3.51, respectively). Slightly higher ORs were also observed for all four health conditions when time permitted for a diagnosis was extended from ⩾ 3 years of age to ⩾ 5 years of age.

Conclusion: In this study, which only allowed for the calculation of unadjusted observational associations, higher ORs were observed within the vaccinated versus unvaccinated group for developmental delays, asthma and ear infections. Further study is necessary to understand the full spectrum of health effects associated with childhood vaccination.

Written by

382   Posts

View All Posts
Follow Me :

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *