tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33052404.post5552615858340083547..comments2024-02-13T21:31:57.980-04:00Comments on Facing Autism in New Brunswick: Autism: Why The (Vaccine) Debate RagesAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05838571980003579163noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33052404.post-57901208450265622392007-06-18T18:48:00.000-03:002007-06-18T18:48:00.000-03:00Ms. Attkisson essentially claims that:(1) Because ...Ms. Attkisson essentially claims that:<BR/>(1) Because government scientists and pharma companies are not infallible, we'd better believe nothing of what they say, even though we haven't the data and expertise needed to participate in a serious debate on these issues.<BR/>(2) Government scientists... have an all-or-nothing approach to vaccination which is bad. They should minimize vaccine complications by providing individualized immunization scheme for each child. (In fact, even if we don't ask how much time and money this would cost, for most vaccine complications it isn't possible at the moment to predict in which child they will happen.)<BR/>(3) Officials and scientists who dispel the vaccine/autism link have ties to vaccine makers, so we mustn't believe what they say. (Don't ask about the ties of off-mainstream scientists who do find vaccine/autism link.)<BR/>(4) Essentially the same as above.<BR/>(5) CDC doesn't provide enough data about the adverse effects of vaccines. (This is the only point which I find agreeable).<BR/>(6) There is no definitive research ruling out vaccines-autism link, because no matter how many such studies are publshed, we can always say they aren't enough and find somebody arguing for the opposite opinion.<BR/>(7) Vaccines may be linked to autism because those who deny the link cannot explain the autism epidemic. (But it isn't proven that the epidemic is real. Some studies deny it, e.g. Shattuck P.T. (2006), The contribution of diagnostic substitution to the growing administrative prevalence of autism in US special education, Pediatrics 117: 1028-37).<BR/>The next citation summarizes what I dislike in Ms. Attkisson's article:<BR/>"Patients feel left to fend for themselves, seeking independent research and opinions on their own. They and their dogged, relentless determination have often been the catalyst that eventually brings medical dangers to the forefront."<BR/>Translation: Medical science could never overcome its fallacies without the contribution of lay people with enlightened revelations about the cause of their medical problems, so go on with your "research", you are no worse than any doctor or scientist.<BR/>Conclusion: I think CDC and its analogs in other countries should provide thorough descriptions of vaccine complications and not force anybody to vaccinate. After enough parents see their unvaccinated children die of measles or their unvaccinated daughters give birth to babies with full-blown congenital rubella, perhaps some truths will find their way to people's heads.Maya Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10877457709995369246noreply@blogger.com