|
« Israel's non-communication pact
Main |
November 02, 2003
Let us all see the evidence
Daily Mail, 1 November 2003 What on earth is the anxious parent to make of all this? Dr Simon Murch, one of the team from London’s Royal Free Hospital which first revealed parental concerns about a possible link between the MMR vaccine, bowel disease and autism in children, now says the vaccine is perfectly safe. Since that original paper was published in 1998, its leading author Dr Andrew Wakefield has been on a personal crusade to persuade health officials and the public that there is increasing evidence to back up his fears of a link in a minority of children who receive the vaccine. Now Dr Murch says the evidence for the overall safety of the vaccine is ‘comprehensive’ and that there is now ‘unequivocal evidence that MMR is not a risk factor for autism’. Yet Dr Wakefield insisted yesterday that there was ‘compelling evidence’ that MMR did play a part in causing bowel disease and autism in some children. His side says it has also obtained potentially devastating evidence of measles virus in the brains of three autistic children. Further tests on one of them have apparently revealed that this virus is consistent with the MMR vaccine. Dr Murch, however, maintains that all the epidemiological studies – which look for patterns of disease in the population – indicate no causal link between MMR and autism. However, these studies are either flawed or inadequate to the task of proving absolutely the vaccine’s safety. True, they all say there is no evidence of any link. But that is quite different from concluding that no link exists. Yet the government and medical experts backing MMR persistently claim they have proved it is safe. What these studies actually suggest is that the jury is still out. Dr Murch is alarmed that so many parents have refused to immunise their children with MMR that a major outbreak of measles is now on the cards -- along with a return of rubella -- resulting in serious illness, handicap or death. This is indeed a grave cause for concern. But wouldn’t this be averted if the government gave parents the choice of single vaccines? Dr Murch claims that parents wouldn’t return after the measles jab for rubella or follow-up vaccinations. But surely it would be better than the current situation, where so many parents simply won’t take the risk of MMR at all? Dr Murch says the risk of damage from measles or rubella is far greater than the minimal risk associated with MMR. Of course, all medical procedures involve weighing one risk against another. But how can we really trust the government’s assurances on this when it dismisses to many pieces of this baffling jigsaw? The truth behind all this controversy can only be settled by clinical evidence. Yet a court case in which a group of parents of autistic children are suing the vaccine’s manufacturers and would, therefore, air all the available evidence, is now in doubt. Legal aid was suddenly withdrawn from the parents’ side on the grounds that they have produced no conclusive evidence of a link. Smelling a rat, the parents are now trying to overturn that decision. Meanwhile, Dr Wakefield’s ‘compelling’ evidence remains secret, and parents are left in the dark. Yet some of the experts who have seen it are the government’s own vaccination advisers. Even if it is not conclusive, the public interest surely demands that it should be placed in the public domain without delay. Only then can public alarm be allayed one way or the other, and children receive the vaccine protection they so clearly need.
Posted by melanie at November 2, 2003
Comments
Unfortunately in the era of sensationalism noone can produce a scientific paper to be subjected to peer review without the tabloid headlines in the broadsheets (!!)exclaiming that some new dire threat has been scooped by the Daily Megaphone. Now we can measure minute particles we are bombarded with threats to our existence because journalists cannot understand ppm as a concept. There are books on Amazon which blame Hepatitis-B vaccines for autism......any statistical correlation can be developed without specifying causation. There are people who react badly to Hep-B; but without the innoculation more would suffer tha adverse consequences of Hep-B than from the contra-indicators of the vaccine. They want to fluoridate water, but do not tell me where I can buy non-fluoridated toothpaste so I don't O.D. on fluoride, which is not a very nice substance. The Middle Class indulged themselves in scaremongering but broadcast it without any real technical discussion and have undermined vaccination as a principle......when rubella spreads, I wonder if GMTV or the Mail, or Express, or BBC will come forward and claim full credit ? We have drug-resistant TB strains now in London; is it really worth developing further vaccines to deal with it, or just let nature take its course and have the fittest survive ? It is the simple fact that we live in a verbal country rather than a scientific one, where risk is not assessable by the innumerate; and the power of scare stories overwhelms rational discourse. It is evidence of the pitifully poor level of scientific education amongst the general populace that cases involving say 1 in 600.000 are presented as if they are universal without exception. On the same lines we are bombarded with information on HIV and AIDS which is a rare condition, certainly when contrasted with chlamydia, syphilis, hepatitis, herpes, cytomegalovirus or gonorrhea......and the media gives the impression that if you take precautions against HIV none of the aforementioned will affect you; which is totally incorrect. If parents are confused, there is lots to be confused about and not just vaccinations. owever last night on Radio 4 File on 4 they spoke of Hepatitis innoculations and infant adverse reactions in the USA, is that the next scare ? The fact is there are lots of infections, diseases, illnesses, bugs, viruses out to kill us......we have means of protection for a while in some cases, but none of these are 100% safe; just as it is not 100% certain you will catch anything without vaccination; but it is most likely you will. Journalists do not engage in education or information but sensationalism; and it is irresponsible to cause people to fail to take precautions. I have never yet seen any article urging people not to worry about HIV because of the drugs available, probably because these journalists know those drugs have terrible side-effects; but they are grateful to have them in place of certain death. Posted by: Peter Williamson at November 3, 2003 11:30 AMIn preparing this article did you read the peer reviewed papers on MMR? The problem with journalists reporting healthscare is that they rarely, if ever, bother to read the original research and rely all too often on reports written by press officers, or even worse, other journalists who never went near the original research which prompted the "healthscare." Posted by: Chris Conlon at November 3, 2003 12:43 PMIf one were to listen only to dirty-vaccine apologists, it would seem perfectly clear that journalists are responsible for the epidemic of autism, and soon to follow, the epidemics of rubella, measles and mumps, for all their yellow journalism in doubting the Gods of Public Health and their sacrosanct jabs. Enough of this bashing of the messengers for the message. It is the Lady Macbeths of British Public Health who now walk amongst the living damned for their conflicts and self-interests and intractable arrogance in refusing to face the realities of their iatrogenic complicity in these matters. These personified mad cows of public health ought to be dispatched from their positions and privileges and replaced by true healers as presently as possible. To those of you officials and vaccine pharmco campaigners who have had a hand in the mental destruction of a generation of children around the world through your promotion, defense and apologies of toxic jabs, you will be served the entire measure of justice you deserve for all your criminal negligence, sooner or later. epedemic maybe not. But you don't have an autistic child do you Peter? Why not allow single dose vacines? Posted by: Mike at November 11, 2003 01:45 AMdoes anyone know how many people visit this site. I am doing reseach on internet communications. Posted by: online casino at January 20, 2004 06:18 PMDon't walk behind me, I may not lead. Don't walk in front of me, I may not follow. Just walk beside me and be my friend. Posted by: Kane Ian at January 21, 2004 11:18 PM |
