So, can we lock him up now?

[lederhosen]

I already knew Andrew Wakefield's paper on the MMR vaccine - the one that caused vaccination rates to plummet in the UK - was based on a sample of just twelve children, and that Wakefield failed to disclose a major conflict of interest. Via james_nicoll, it turns out that even those twelve cases aren't trustworthy:

In most of the 12 cases, the children’s ailments as described in The Lancet were different from their hospital and GP records. Although the research paper claimed that problems came on within days of the jab, in only one case did medical records suggest this was true, and in many of the cases medical concerns had been raised before the children were vaccinated. Hospital pathologists, looking for inflammatory bowel disease, reported in the majority of cases that the gut was normal. This was then reviewed and the Lancet paper showed them as abnormal.

Despite involving just a dozen children, the 1998 paper’s impact was extraordinary. After its publication, rates of inoculation fell from 92% to below 80%. Populations acquire “herd immunity” from measles when more than 95% of people have been vaccinated.

Last week official figures showed that 1,348 confirmed cases of measles in England and Wales were reported last year, compared with 56 in 1998. Two children have died of the disease.

At the very least, I hope Wakefield is never allowed to practice medicine again. (This sort of thing, BTW, is why House makes me uncomfortable - I've no doubt that Wakefield has genuinely convinced himself that there's a link, and therefore the ends justifies the means; unfortunately, in the real world, doctors with hunches are often disastrously wrong.)

Meanwhile, the fire stories from Victoria are just awful. Now up to 84 confirmed dead, probably more. Called my stepmother, and her family are currently okay; will check on my sister-in-law tomorrow.

Comments

[lederhosen.livejournal.com]

FWIW, I thought it was a reasonable question to ask. But I'm the sort of person who will happily argue against a proof of something I strongly believe in, if I don't like the proof.

For actual answers to the question, Wikipedia cites multiple large epidemiological studies that found no link between MMR and autism. Institute of Medicine report is here; CDC one seems to be broken at present.

[nefaria.livejournal.com]

I had mixed feelings when I first heard it, I thought it had something to do with mercury. I know the USA had all these rules about keeping mercury away from kids, even small doses can cause severe damage, BUT it's perfectly safe in dental fillings! Honest...

So, I was skeptical at first, but it does seem to be bad research on Wakefield's part. According to Wikipedia, the MMR vaccine can have some bad side effects (very rare) but the benefits seem to far outweight the downsides.

[lederhosen.livejournal.com]

I had mixed feelings when I first heard it, I thought it had something to do with mercury.

Okay, this is where it gets confusing. There's a mercury-based preservative called thimerosal that's used in some vaccines (although now being phased out).

Part of the vaccination-autism scare involved vaccines containing thimerosal (and I can certainly understand people being concerned about mercury compounds). Another part of the scare involved the MMR vaccine - I think the MMR scare got a bigger share of the coverage in the UK than it did in the USA, possibly because Wakefield is UK-based. Sometimes the two get blurred together, and people have claimed that thimerosal in MMR causes autism... even in areas where thimerosal isn't actually used in the MMR vaccine.

(And yes, MMR vaccination has side-effects up to and including death, but nowhere near those from the diseases it protects against.)