Another reason as to why Autism diagnoses keep going up is $$$$$. States report autism rates to the Fed in hopes of getting more federal funds. Parents want $$$$ and extra school resources and are much more aggressive about seeking a diagnosis than they were in previous decades. Consider this:
...our pedi highly recommends vaccines, but recoginizes in the last twenty years the load has increased on kids. He is the expert we trust, and he isn't 100% sure it all good. I think if he and I were just friends and were drinking beer on the porch, he'd admit he'd like to see a slightly less aggressive schedule. That's a more reasonable approach. But your pedi probably isn't an "expert" in this area. Some GP/primary care docs, while of course being MD's, aren't privy to much more insights than what a curious and intelligent patient can find out himself. And to be fair, there's just a lot of stuff that is still unknown; look at cholesterol levels, for example, and the connection to heart attacks. The connection may be quite a bit different from what we thought. The fact is, the increased load is a relatively new thing (20 years) and while I suspect there is very little in the way of connection between autism and vaccines, I also think spreading out the exposure to known toxins (formaldahyde, etc.) is a good thing. That's only one side of the equation. The other side is the risk of increased contraction of disease due to spreading out the vaccines. So you can't really say it's a good thing till that analysis is done. This would be an interesting study.
My understanding is that there is no data to back up the link of vaccines with autism. Lots of studies have been done and the link doesn't seem to be there. Let me speak as a cold, hard evolution person here for a minute. In pre-modern societies, having a child like this meant that the kid would be exposed and killed, or that it would be unlikely to reproduce even if it grew to adulthood. Since it takes 9 months to carry a child, parents that possess the gene or genes that cause autism (along with mental retardation or anything disability from birth) would be producing less offspring that go on to breed themselves over time. In pre-modern societies, the number of offspring you have dramatically effects the number that live to pass on your genes due to high infant and child mortality rates. This would lead to the gene/genes being suppressed in the population. It's really hard to get rid of a mutation that causes a reduction in reproductive success, but very easy to suppress it. Fast forward to modern societies. Mortality rates are much lower than in the past and people live a lot longer so having one child that may not reproduce is not that big of a hit genetically. This causes the gene/genes to not be suppressed and the frequency rises. I think the same thing is at work with things such as poor eyesight etc. That would be a big disadvantage in hunter/gather societies and the frequency would be suppressed. With modern technology and glasses, it isn't a big deal anymore. I sincerely hope that no parents with autistic children are offended by this. Our society and caring for others is dramatically different than it was in the past. A lot of the things that were cold, hard realities back then no longer apply.
Fast forward to modern societies. Mortality rates are much lower than in the past and people live a lot longer so having one child that may not reproduce is not that big of a hit genetically. This causes the gene/genes to not be suppressed and the frequency rises. So you probably think that 3 generations of autistics are enough? Just kidding, and my apologies to Justice Holmes....
I've always considered theropods response as the reason for the increases. We have put both of our kids on a regular schedule with no issues. Now, if you want to talk about birth control and its effects on the creation of a child..
I am another important reason to get the new vaccines such as varicella AND the booster shots. When I was younger I got the chicken pox, they got infected with impetigo that my little sister got a daycare. I was in the hospital for a little bit. You or your kids can still die from these types of diseases. Vaccines are around for a reason.
Exposure to some antigens during early infancy promotes the switching of Th2 cells to Th1. (Gross oversimplification): Th1 cells have less to do with common allergies than Th2 cells do, and promoting the switch is good for your kid. Dr. Grant said that basically, it's good for your kid to grow up with a dog in the house. This idea was based on studies on European farming families who lived above their animals (Europeans build strange houses) and had fewer allergies. Not sure how much work has been done since that time, but the hygiene hypothesis is very popular among immunologists.
Perham1 -- I have no issues with your last post directed at me, except to say, in Austin Texas, a pediatrician has to know his **** on vaccines as there's a whole granola movement here with people opting out completely. He was able to discuss the components of each vaccine, discuss studies, etc. His concern was in the short period of time the load has been increased, there hasn't been enough time to study its effects -- either way. He's not the researcher but an educated consumer (if you will) of the research. I think he's a little put off by the focus on autism instead of focusing on broader issues that may or may not exist. Based on that, our comfort level is to take the 12 month visit immunizations, as an example, and do them over several months. I'm not claiming to be making this decision on hard science, I am claiming to be making this decision based on a lack of definitive hard science either way -- not on the immune system or the effects of immunizations or hygiene or whatever else, but rather the effect of 5 immunizations at once, given in multiple shots with known human carcinogens as preservatives (not mercury) and other possible stresses with bundling these vaccines. To me, the issues will likely be settled in 10 additional years when we have an adult population that has been immunized under the current loads. Well, then the answers will be too late. Basically, I think there is more information to be gathered, but I won't get the benefit of it, so we're doing what we think is best based on our expert (who may not be the expert).
Yet another study came out yesterday proving that thimerosol is not the same form of toxic mercury that has caused humans to get sick before. thimerosol has a half life thats ten times shorter than the other form of mercury.
brandons, can you provide a link to a couple of those long-term studies of modified vs. recommended vax schedules?
One of my grandsons has had no vax's whatsovever (he's almost 5). What is the seriousness of his risk? Grandma & I have been bothered by this considerably, but the boy's hippie holistic vegan parents are too hardheaded on this topic to even mention it any more..
OK-- I didn't bother to read the posts above, so this may be a repeat. BUT... Here's what I learned in my most recent ABA training session: There has only been ONE research study that showed any link between Autism and vaccinations. It was conducted in England a while back, and showed that mercury in the vacs caused the autism. The guy who conducted the experiments was even fired. He caused such a stir in the UK that people are still leery of getting vacs-- and thus they're now having statistically more ocurances of diseases that the vacs would have prevented than they would have had of Autism. There have been many attempts to replicate this study, and no one has been able to replicate the results- -which proves that it was NOT a valid study. There is NO solid scientific proof that there is any link between vaccinations and Autism. There is also no mercury in vacs anymore anyway. However, Autism is occurring on an epidemic scale around the globe. We DO know that 1 in 150 babies in the US is born w/ an Autism spectrum disorder. We DO know that boys are more likely to get it by a ratio of 4:1. We DO know that Autism statistics are higher if you look at them world-wide-- more like 7:1 boys. We DO know that people who live in more industrial areas-- like silicon valley and coastal shipping areas are more likely to have Autism. We also know that I'm quoting these numbers off the top of my head and I'll have to pull out some paperwork tomorrow at school to be able to confirm them-- but they're close. We also know that children w/ PDD look normal, and we wouldn't really see the symptoms until age 2. The only research I've seen lately that seems to have any merit is looking at computer use while pregnant and the ocurance of Autism. More computer= more likely to be Autistic. It's scary stuff, but there's no real answers right now. Which is even more scary.
Saw this on aol today... No Autism Link to Common Child Vaccine By Michael Kahn,Reuters Posted: 2008-02-05 11:46:08 LONDON (Feb. 4) - A vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella does not cause autism, according to the largest study yet showing there is no evidence linking the childhood shot to the development disorder. The study, published on Tuesday in the Archives of Disease in Childhood, found no evidence of any abnormal biological response from the shot that could point to a link between the vaccine and autism. "This study really supports the view these are safe vaccines," said David Brown, a researcher at Britain's Health Protection Agency who worked on the study. "The evidence is now so solid there really isn't a need for further studies here." In 1998, Dr. Andrew Wakefield of Royal Free Hospital in London and colleagues sparked a fierce worldwide debate among scientists and a health scare by suggesting the MMR jab caused autism. Outbreaks of all three diseases followed. Autism is marked by a variety of difficulties in social interaction and behavior, from the awkwardness of Asperger syndrome to severely debilitating repetitive behaviors and an inability to speak. The British study looked at nearly 100 autistic children, a group of 52 with learning difficulties and 90 who were developing normally. All the volunteers chosen from a sample of 57,000 children in southern England had received an MMR vaccination but not everybody got both doses, said Gillian Baird, a pediatrician at the Newcomen Centre for Child Development, who led the study. The researchers took blood samples from the children and found no abnormal immune response in any of them marked by higher antibody levels or presence of a measles virus still left in the body from the shot, Baird added. Wakefield, whose research has been widely discredited, had pointed to these two factors as a way to explain the link but the latest findings do not back up that case, Baird said. Wakefield said in a newspaper interview last year he believed it was biologically plausible the shot could cause autism. "There was no difference across any of the groups no matter how you cut them up," Baird said in a telephone interview. "The response to the MMR vaccine was the same in every group." Before Wakefield's study, more than 90 percent of British children received the vaccination, a figure that dropped to 80 percent before recovering to a current 85 percent, according to government figures. Baird said she hoped the findings, along with a U.S. study last week showing that a mercury-based preservative called thimerosal did not cause autism, would bolster confidence in the MMR shot. "It is a big study and we hope people can have confidence in the MMR shot again," Baird said in a telephone interview. "Measles has come back again because people have stopped immunizing their children."
There are limits on the conclusions one can draw from that study and it does not answer the fundamental question.First - the limits on the study as acknowledged by the authors of the study:
