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

The "vaccination causes autism" fraud

theincidentaleconomist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 83 posts

Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud

#21

Post by huxley »

kragen wrote: post #17
phren0logy wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please provide credible (i.e. peer-reviewed) references to the symptoms you describe being a known side-effect of MMR vaccination? And to doctors being "encouraged" not to admit said side-effects? I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying what you are describing is really unusual. Which brings me to my next point: any decision has consequences. If there is a 1 in 1 billion chance of a side-effect, and a 1…

> Who is "society" if not "all the patients?" In your hypothetical case, the treatment is beneficial both for society and for the patient. On the other hand, if there is a 1 in 100 chance of a side effect versus a 1 in 1000 chance of getting a debilitating disease, the vaccination may not be good for the patient. But if the chance of getting the debilitating disease would be 1 in 10 without herd immunity, then the va…

Just to adjust your calculations a bit since side effects aren't all equal, the ranges are likely much higher than you mentioned.

Trivial side effects (small temporary rash) are probably in the 1-in-100 range. Moderate non-life-threatening are probably in the 1-in-3000 range.

Dangerous or life-threatening side effects are in the one in a million+ range.

Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud

#22

Post by SeanDav »

phren0logy wrote: post #13
SeanDav wrote: post #8

Bottom line: vaccines are good for society but fault lines occur because vaccines are not always good for individuals and government are conditioned to not admit this or keep it as quiet as possible. My daughter had complications 10 days after her MMR in the UK. She had episodes of going floppy and eyes rolling back in her head while making strange mewing sounds. 10 days is around the time that the measles component…

Can you please provide credible (i.e. peer-reviewed) references to the symptoms you describe being a known side-effect of MMR vaccination? And to doctors being "encouraged" not to admit said side-effects? I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying what you are describing is really unusual. Which brings me to my next point: any decision has consequences. If there is a 1 in 1 billion chance of a side-effect, and a 1…

Sure the "peer" review you require is on the long list of side-effects on one of the MMR manufacturer's own packaging. Look it up.

The doctors being encouraged comes from the mouth of a doctor friend of ours that used to work for the NHS. Sorry you are just going to have to take my word on this. I can't prove this.

Disagree with you on individual verse society point, but this is a discussion for another day.

Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud

#23

Post by cynicalkane »

burgerbrain wrote: post #12
SeanDav wrote: post #8

Bottom line: vaccines are good for society but fault lines occur because vaccines are not always good for individuals and government are conditioned to not admit this or keep it as quiet as possible. My daughter had complications 10 days after her MMR in the UK. She had episodes of going floppy and eyes rolling back in her head while making strange mewing sounds. 10 days is around the time that the measles component…

Unless you are a trained medical professional in this particular area of study, you have absolutely no business making up your own mind.

A sufficiently intelligent and reasonable person should be able to, with enough consideration, make up his mind about just about anything that lives in a knowledge domain. It's not like the medical profession emerged fully-formed from the head of Zeus.

Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud

#24

Post by SeanDav »

ceejayoz wrote: post #18
SeanDav wrote: post #8

Bottom line: vaccines are good for society but fault lines occur because vaccines are not always good for individuals and government are conditioned to not admit this or keep it as quiet as possible. My daughter had complications 10 days after her MMR in the UK. She had episodes of going floppy and eyes rolling back in her head while making strange mewing sounds. 10 days is around the time that the measles component…

> My daughter had complications 10 days after her MMR in the UK. A one-in-a-million coincidence happens 7,000 times in the world's population. There will always be anecdotes, correlation doesn't prove causation.

Exactly the point the doctors used (without the statistics). Sure, it could have been coincidence but why say there was no chance it was a side effect? In fact, since her symptoms are a known side effect it is more likely it was not just a coincidence, not so?

Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud

#25

Post by SeanDav »

rmc wrote: post #16
SeanDav wrote: post #8

Bottom line: vaccines are good for society but fault lines occur because vaccines are not always good for individuals and government are conditioned to not admit this or keep it as quiet as possible. My daughter had complications 10 days after her MMR in the UK. She had episodes of going floppy and eyes rolling back in her head while making strange mewing sounds. 10 days is around the time that the measles component…

Bottom line: vaccines are good for society but fault lines occur because vaccines are not always good for individuals Bottom line: vaccines are good for society but fault lines occur because some vaccines are not always good for individuals, however the MMR vaccine has been found completly safe.

Absolute rubbish, there is no such thing as a completely safe vaccine.

Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud

#26

Post by kragen »

huxley wrote: post #21
kragen wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who is "society" if not "all the patients?" In your hypothetical case, the treatment is beneficial both for society and for the patient. On the other hand, if there is a 1 in 100 chance of a side effect versus a 1 in 1000 chance of getting a debilitating disease, the vaccination may not be good for the patient. But if the chance of getting the debilitating disease would be 1 in 10 without herd immunity, then the va…

Just to adjust your calculations a bit since side effects aren't all equal, the ranges are likely much higher than you mentioned. Trivial side effects (small temporary rash) are probably in the 1-in-100 range. Moderate non-life-threatening are probably in the 1-in-3000 range. Dangerous or life-threatening side effects are in the one in a million+ range.

This varies a lot by vaccine. The typhoid-fever vaccine I took in 2003 has "trivial side effects" in the 90-in-100 range, I think --- namely, you feel sick for a few days.

Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud

#27

Post by reedlaw »

burgerbrain wrote: post #12
SeanDav wrote: post #8

Bottom line: vaccines are good for society but fault lines occur because vaccines are not always good for individuals and government are conditioned to not admit this or keep it as quiet as possible. My daughter had complications 10 days after her MMR in the UK. She had episodes of going floppy and eyes rolling back in her head while making strange mewing sounds. 10 days is around the time that the measles component…

Unless you are a trained medical professional in this particular area of study, you have absolutely no business making up your own mind.

That's an extremely funny statement if it's meant to be ironic. Almost like "unless you are a %w[Politician, Clergyman, Philosopher] you have no business making up your own mind about %w[politics, religion, the meaning of life]."

Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud

#29

Post by phren0logy »

SeanDav wrote: post #22
phren0logy wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please provide credible (i.e. peer-reviewed) references to the symptoms you describe being a known side-effect of MMR vaccination? And to doctors being "encouraged" not to admit said side-effects? I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying what you are describing is really unusual. Which brings me to my next point: any decision has consequences. If there is a 1 in 1 billion chance of a side-effect, and a 1…

Sure the "peer" review you require is on the long list of side-effects on one of the MMR manufacturer's own packaging. Look it up. The doctors being encouraged comes from the mouth of a doctor friend of ours that used to work for the NHS. Sorry you are just going to have to take my word on this. I can't prove this. Disagree with you on individual verse society point, but this is a discussion for another day.

I will continue to search, but I also want to point out a common misperception: adverse events in the PDR or on product packaging are simply a list of all reported adverse events, with little data to demonstrate causality. Common medications often have dozens to hundreds. Clearly, some of these are valid, but with more rare events it becomes harder to say. This kind of data is important, but should be viewed in context.

Some of what you describes sounds a bit like Guillain-Barré Syndrome, but there are some more idiosyncratic elements. Either way, I hope your daughter is safe and feeling better.

My point here is not to be argumentative, but I really do feel that as a physician I have a duty to point out that the overwhelming majority of available data suggests that routine vaccines for common childhood illnesses (those recommended by the CDC and NSH) are safe and effective. Clearly, sometimes people have adverse side-effects, but the data support that the risk of a bad outcome is worse without the vaccine than with. Either decision has consequences.

Re: The "vaccination causes autism" fraud

#30

Post by notahacker »

reedlaw wrote: post #27
burgerbrain wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you are a trained medical professional in this particular area of study, you have absolutely no business making up your own mind.

That's an extremely funny statement if it's meant to be ironic. Almost like "unless you are a %w[Politician, Clergyman, Philosopher] you have no business making up your own mind about %w[politics, religion, the meaning of life]."

Unlike politicians, clergymen or philosophers, scientists have pretty universally established standards for establishing when "your own mind" about a causal relationship between x and y is almost certainly wrong; rejecting their approach to doing it (i.e. go to school and learn for several years so you can critique the research rather than basing your view on anecdotes collected by yellow journalists) is tantamount to rejecting science as a discipline. Yes, it's elitist, but there's a reason I don't ask the man on the street to prescribe me medicine whilst being perfectly willing to debate the merits of the current government with him.
Post reply on HN