Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 133 posts

Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds

#51

Post by brc »

brudgers wrote: post #46
johngalt wrote: post #23

I don't understand the Anti-Vaccine crowd. I see no possible way for what they espouse to be morally responsible. Without vaccines the mortality rate of children to these diseases would be higher than the total rate of autism. This means that you would have more kids die than get autism even if every case of autism was directly caused by a vaccine. This leaves us with two options for the beliefs of the anti-vaccinati…

> "I don't understand the Anti-Vaccine crowd." While I don't agree with the factual basis on which they are making their decision, it is entirely rational given their belief. MMR are [edit] usually temporary and can typically be effectively treated by the medical systems of industrialized nations, whereas autism is permanent and generally untreatable. It is analogous to purchasing a large heavy vehicle (e.g. SUV) bas…

For a start, 'MMR' isn't a disease. It's an acronym for the vaccine which is Measles, Mumps and Rubella. Each of which is thought of as a benign disease, but can have bad consequences.

Measles has a death rate of healthy adults of 3 in 1000. It is deadly for people with compromised immune systems, such as someone with AIDS. Mumps is less of a threat but can still lead to other complications such as testicular infection and possibile sterility in young men. Rubella is generally benign but if a pregnant woman contracts the disease in the first trimester it has a 1 in 5 chance of miscarriage, and in the remaining surviving cases the infant can be severely handicapped including sight, heart, bone and organ problems. You absolutely do want Rubella immunity amongst all women of childbearing age.

So I don't understand the anti-vaccine crowd either. Because the range of possible outcomes can be also very bad, and the chances are much higher of contracting one of the diseases than of developing Autism.

Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds

#52

Post by Mz »

pharrington wrote: post #49
Mz wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those aren't the only two options. But I mostly avoid discussions like this on HN because the atmosphere here is pretty openly judgmental and hostile (a la your remark) so I don't see any real good coming out of trying to discuss it. It doesn't help that anyone here who is anti-vax tends to post in these threads in a manner that just promotes the view that we are all extremist nutcases, unfamiliar with basic logic, e…

The reason people are so hostile about this is because the anti-vaccination belief is objectively wrong and literally fatal. It is directly analogous to believing AIDS isn't spread by HIV.

I don't think it's quite that simple. Most scientific views boil down to "belief" -- by that I mean that most people are essentially taking the word of some expert or other without themselves genuinely understanding it and, also, the lovely drawings of the solar system, tectonic plates, etc that you find in scientific materials are basically made up fantasies. If you used any kind of meaningful scale for the solar system, it would not fit on the pages of any book. In 8th grade, the entire class was asked to do a model of the solar system. I was sick and missed a bunch of school and turned mine in late. The teacher was trying to ding me hard for not having a scale. Then I explained that I had run the calculations and if I used 1mm = approx 33 million miles, then Mercury would be about 1mm from the sun, Venus would be about 2mm from the sun, Earth would be about 3mm from the sun and Pluto would be about 100 meters plus 8 millimeters and the model wouldn't even fit in the classroom. Tectonic plate drawings are basically a mental model and while you can find geologic evidence of them, they don't look as nice and clean as the drawings suggest and it was a very controversial theory for like the first 50 years, IIRC.

So I think most arguments like this boil down to "belief" on both sides and it is usually pointless to try to sway the other side. I didn't stop vaccinating based on "scientific" anything. I stopped because the people who had information that was getting me healthier all were anti-vax. So I stopped based on "social proof", so to speak -- which isn't really any different than most folks who believe their scientists and doctors are correct but they think it is vastly different, so my "social proof" only damns me as it is viewed as further evidence that I am a fruitcake.

So I generally make no effort to argue the science involved.

Peace.

Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds

#53

Post by hartror »

Mz wrote: post #45
hartror wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow downvotes? I don't agree with most of this position but this viewpoint is while an anecdote and not based solidly in science is valid. Certainly a healthy balanced diet creates a healthier body and something everyone should implement whether they are managing a chronic illness or not. I don't agree with not vaccinating as a general rule, but I am not overly familiar with cystic fibrosis so I am not aware of what…

Could you describe why you chose not to vaccinate for anything? :-) Wildly inaccurate assumption. :-) My oldest son is fully vaccinated. I was diagnosed with CF in May 2001, just before I turned 36. My oldest son was diagnosed the following month, shortly after turning 14. (He was born the day after my 22nd birthday. My youngest was born on my 5th wedding anniversary. When I was married, I went around telling everyon…

Would you immunize yourself or your children for things like MMR now?

I think science and doctors are getting better at studying the holistic approach you talk about, and some things will be born out by the facts and others won't. I am glad things are working for you and your family, and certainly I would contend that a sufferer of a disease like CF is a someone who can rely on herd immunity and boost their immune systems in other ways, and not draw critizim for doing so.

Certainly what you eat has an a large impact, but the complexity of our bodies is such that it is very difficult to draw conclusions on what helps people or not.

I strongly disagree with "the chemical impact is greater than what drugs do to the body". If your diet is lacking in vitamin c does getting the vitamin from an supplement (in "drug" form if you like) have a greater effect that getting it from an orange I think you would agree not and I would say it is the same. (I am using vitamin C here as the supplement/drug because it has been shown to be taken up by the body just as effectively in both forms.

Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds

#54

Post by klondikered »

davidj wrote: post #12

Vaccines do cause autism. Here is a peer reviewed paper in the journal of Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry, the abstract: Mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired oxidative-reduction activity, degeneration, and death in human neuronal and fetal cells induced by low-level exposure to thimerosal and other metal compounds Authors: D. A. Geiera; P. G. Kingb; M. R. Geierc Abstract Thimerosal (ethylmercurithiosalicylic…

Your argument that "vaccines cause autism" has huge problems, not the least of which are thimerosal-free vaccines over the last decade.

In addition, the authors of the first study you cited appear to be involved in vaccine litigation and in a business that purports to treat autism by "chelation therapy" and would thus seem to have a vested interest in research findings that show heavy metals cause pathology.

Your second link doesn't go to a paper - you linked to some anti-vaccine website which itself doesn't link to a paper.

There actually is a paper in JANE here:

http://www.ane.pl/pdf/7020.pdf

You can read the paper for yourself - but I am personally not at all impressed by an N=16, with N=3 in the control group. Complete MRI data in this study were obtained on N=9 in the treatment group, and only N=2 in the control group.

Another discussion of the posters that preceded this second paper's publication can be found at:

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=100 http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=1989

and the second paper itself at:

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/new-paper-vaccines-cause-auti...

You rather carefully chose to note that neither paper was "written" by Wakefield. However, the authors of the second paper noted that Wakefield reviewed their paper and actually helped design their study:

"We thank Drs. Saverio Capuano and Mario Rodriguez for veterinary assistance; and Dr. David Atwood, Carrie Redinger, Dave McFarland, Amanda Dettmer, Steven Kendro, Nicole DeBlasio, Melanie O’Malley and Megan Rufle for technical support. Special thanks to Dr. Andrew Wakefield for assistance with study design and for critical review of this manuscript; and to Troy and Charlie Ball and Robert Sawyer. This work was supported by the Johnson Family, SafeMinds, The Ted Lindsay Foundation, the Autism Research Institute, the Greater Milwaukee Foundation, the late Liz Birt, David and Cindy Emminger, Sandy McInnis, and Elyse Roberts. Prior to 2005, Carol Stott was involved in vaccine litigation."

Papers aside, some anti-vaccine folk seem to have a great deal of emotion invested in the issue:

http://briandeer.com/mmr/carol-stott.htm

Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds

#55

Post by bugsy »

davidj wrote: post #12

Vaccines do cause autism. Here is a peer reviewed paper in the journal of Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry, the abstract: Mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired oxidative-reduction activity, degeneration, and death in human neuronal and fetal cells induced by low-level exposure to thimerosal and other metal compounds Authors: D. A. Geiera; P. G. Kingb; M. R. Geierc Abstract Thimerosal (ethylmercurithiosalicylic…

Thanks very much for those sources.

Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds

#56

Post by nl »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #17
davidj wrote: post #12

Vaccines do cause autism. Here is a peer reviewed paper in the journal of Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry, the abstract: Mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired oxidative-reduction activity, degeneration, and death in human neuronal and fetal cells induced by low-level exposure to thimerosal and other metal compounds Authors: D. A. Geiera; P. G. Kingb; M. R. Geierc Abstract Thimerosal (ethylmercurithiosalicylic…

Don't just vote him down, folks...he's posting links and support for his position. Surely someone on HN is knowledgeable enough on this subject to respond with something more detailed than clicking a down arrow...

It's pretty clear this is a troll account (ie, one that exists to post controversial statements in order to cause grief). Here are some examples:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1782355

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1935416

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1994504

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2041013

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2027532

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2018434

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2018405

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1881991

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1935387

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1919731

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1914963

I think the best response here is to down-vote and not engage beyond the sensible rebuttal that has been posted.

Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds

#57

Post by pharrington »

Mz wrote: post #52
pharrington wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason people are so hostile about this is because the anti-vaccination belief is objectively wrong and literally fatal. It is directly analogous to believing AIDS isn't spread by HIV.

I don't think it's quite that simple. Most scientific views boil down to "belief" -- by that I mean that most people are essentially taking the word of some expert or other without themselves genuinely understanding it and, also, the lovely drawings of the solar system, tectonic plates, etc that you find in scientific materials are basically made up fantasies. If you used any kind of meaningful scale for the solar sy…

Your "social proof" has a name, its called anecdotes. While occasionally reasonable in the small scale, it is absurd to believe local observations have any merit in the grand scale.

"Most scientific views boil down to 'belief'" this almost sounds like your saying that nothing can truly be knowable. This is the path of nilism, not reason.

Science has a rigorous process, peer review being part of it. One does not have to be an expert in the field to read numerous studies, evaluate their methodology, reason as to whether the conclusion actually matches the data+experiments, and see if the results across the studies were consistent. This isn't an act of faith.

Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds

#58

Post by Mz »

hartror wrote: post #53
Mz wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you describe why you chose not to vaccinate for anything? :-) Wildly inaccurate assumption. :-) My oldest son is fully vaccinated. I was diagnosed with CF in May 2001, just before I turned 36. My oldest son was diagnosed the following month, shortly after turning 14. (He was born the day after my 22nd birthday. My youngest was born on my 5th wedding anniversary. When I was married, I went around telling everyon…

Would you immunize yourself or your children for things like MMR now? I think science and doctors are getting better at studying the holistic approach you talk about, and some things will be born out by the facts and others won't. I am glad things are working for you and your family, and certainly I would contend that a sufferer of a disease like CF is a someone who can rely on herd immunity and boost their immune sy…

Would you immunize yourself or your children for things like MMR now?

My sons are both legal adults, so it is no longer my decision to make for them. I don't have plans/expectations to have more kids. I would be very reluctant to get anymore vaccinations. I have done better without them. So far, I haven't really had to make any decisions regarding some "position" along those lines. I don't recall the last time I had the flu or a cold. I think the things we are doing does provide protection from infection, but you have to stay on top of it. It isn't a nice simple "do it once" solution -- but those solutions weren't working for me anyway.

I took quite a lot of supplements for a long time. I take very few these days. I think it is better to get it from food, if possible. If you do the research, you find, for example, that magnesium is best absorbed when taken with calcium and calcium is best absorbed when taken with a few other things. I think there are also micronutrients in food that have yet to be adequately cataloged and studied. So I think food is, generally speaking, a superior means to get what we need because we can't replicate the complexity of food with our supplements, though supplements definitely had their place for a long time for me while I was trying to undo decades of damage and it simply wasn't possible to get the high doses of nutrients I needed from food alone.

Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds

#59

Post by brudgers »

brc wrote: post #51
brudgers wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I don't understand the Anti-Vaccine crowd." While I don't agree with the factual basis on which they are making their decision, it is entirely rational given their belief. MMR are [edit] usually temporary and can typically be effectively treated by the medical systems of industrialized nations, whereas autism is permanent and generally untreatable. It is analogous to purchasing a large heavy vehicle (e.g. SUV) bas…

For a start, 'MMR' isn't a disease. It's an acronym for the vaccine which is Measles, Mumps and Rubella. Each of which is thought of as a benign disease, but can have bad consequences. Measles has a death rate of healthy adults of 3 in 1000. It is deadly for people with compromised immune systems, such as someone with AIDS. Mumps is less of a threat but can still lead to other complications such as testicular infecti…

I have corrected the grammatical error. It now says, "MMR are temporary." I was fully aware of what MMR stands for, and thank you for pointing out my lack of clarity.

With a mortality rate of 3 in 1000 and an incidence of ~.2 cases per 1,000,000 per year in the US, one would predict a death from measles about every 5 years or so.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5331a3.htm

Given claims in the media that 1 in every 150 people is effected by Autism, a reasonable person might calculate that their child is 33,333 times more likely to be autistic than to die from measles.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-02-08-autism_x.htm

Even if one believes there is only 0.1% chance that there is a causal link between MMR vaccines and autism, the probable risk of autism is still orders of magnitude higher than dying from measles.

It is only if one believes that the probability of a causal link between the MMR vaccine and autism is approximately zero that the risk of death from measles is greater than that of autism.

Once one believes that there is even a slight possibility of a link, then there can be a justified belief that the benefits of no vaccination outweigh the risks.

Even if I believe otherwise.

Re: Retracted autism/vaccine study an 'elaborate fraud,' British journal finds

#60

Post by ceejayoz »

brudgers wrote: post #46
johngalt wrote: post #23

I don't understand the Anti-Vaccine crowd. I see no possible way for what they espouse to be morally responsible. Without vaccines the mortality rate of children to these diseases would be higher than the total rate of autism. This means that you would have more kids die than get autism even if every case of autism was directly caused by a vaccine. This leaves us with two options for the beliefs of the anti-vaccinati…

> "I don't understand the Anti-Vaccine crowd." While I don't agree with the factual basis on which they are making their decision, it is entirely rational given their belief. MMR are [edit] usually temporary and can typically be effectively treated by the medical systems of industrialized nations, whereas autism is permanent and generally untreatable. It is analogous to purchasing a large heavy vehicle (e.g. SUV) bas…

> MMR are [edit] usually temporary and can typically be effectively treated by the medical systems of industrialized nations, whereas autism is permanent and generally untreatable.

Sure, but forgoing the MMR vaccine to prevent autism makes as much sense as forgoing baths to prevent brain tumours.

Post reply on HN