anyone heard about this? Probe vaccine/autism

[JBaxter]

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4685191/probe-to-reveal-link-between-vaccine-settlements-and-autism/

Interesting enough to have me tune in tomorrow. It kind of caught me by surprise today when I heard it.

[mackmama]

Wow. I am curious to read more about the reports tomorrow.

[scrooks]

Wow. I am curious to read more about the reports tomorrow.

:yeahthat:

As a side note. I saw on the ABC evening news a short blurb about study in Korea were they found the incidence of autism to be 1 in 38 children versus the 1 in 100 or so number that is commonly referenced.

[Melaine]

Can't wait to hear more on this...very interesting!

[kijip]

It is no secret that the national vaccine injury compensation program has paid families whose children are injured by vaccines. I don't believe that this is a huge revelation. Vaccine injuries are rare, but they do happen and thus the fund. I am sure that some of the kids who received funds have autism but that does not mean that their vaccine injury was autism.

Also what the hell is wrong with that reporter? Calling such settlements, which are distributed for care and damages costs in pretty tragic outcomes "rewards" is outrageous.

I have no interest in engaging in a debate on a link between vaccines and autism. I feel confident that my choice to vax pretty much on schedule was the best choice for my family and public health.

[scrooks]

. I am sure that some of the kids who received funds have autism but that does not mean that their vaccine injury was autism.

I was wondering this. I will be curious to see the evidence they produce to show a direct correlation. I would think that would be hard to do when so many other studies haven't found one....

[Melaine]

It is no secret that the national vaccine injury compensation program has paid families whose children are injured by vaccines. I don't believe that this is a huge revelation. Vaccine injuries are rare, but they do happen and thus the fund. I am sure that some of the kids who received funds have autism but that does not mean that their vaccine injury was autism.

Also what the hell is wrong with that reporter? Calling such settlements, which are distributed for care and damages costs in pretty tragic outcomes "rewards" is outrageous.

I have no interest in engaging in a debate on a link between vaccines and autism. I feel confident that my choice to vax pretty much on schedule was the best choice for my family and public health.

Your post seems to be very combative for someone who doesn't want to "debate". No one is challenging your choice, this thread was discussing a news clip, not re-kindling this exhausted debate. I'm just confused about the aggression I'm sensing that just doesn't seem to fit with the mood of this thread (previous threads, sure, but not this one).

As for the anchor, I thought he was saying "awards" the entire time, which would make sense considering the context. I agree that "rewards" would be totally inappropriate verbiage, and if he said that, it's ridiculous!

[daisymommy]

If you consider that:

CDC has acknowledged that vaccines can and do cause brain inflammation (encephalopathy) and brain damage.
This can be and is sued for under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund. Awards totaling in the millions have been given.

It is acknowledged and known that brain inflammation and brain damage can cause autism.

But the CDC will not connect the dots and say that yes, vaccines can cause autism.

Makes me want to :6:

The gov't also does not keep a record of how many children that are awarded funds for vaccine injuries also have autism.

http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/table.htm
http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/statistics_report.htm#claims_filed

[Gena]

As a side note. I saw on the ABC evening news a short blurb about study in Korea were they found the incidence of autism to be 1 in 38 children versus the 1 in 100 or so number that is commonly referenced.


There is widespread terrible mis-reporting of the study. What the study actually found was that 1 in 38 children may have some traits/characteristics of autism, which is not the same thing as having an autism spectrum disorder.

The study is very interesting and raises a lot of questions. However, there are definate issues with it, including the fact that it looks at only one community and has what the authors admit is a "less-than-optimal participation rate in the general-population sample" (63%, these types of studies usually need close to 80% participation to protect against bias).

Still, if 1 in 38 children have traits of autism, it's time to revise our defintion of "normal".

You can read the full study here:
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/reprint/appi.ajp.2011.10101532v1?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=1&title=autism&andorexacttitle=and&andorexacttitleabs=and&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT

[Green_Tea]

I am not sure why Fox News is describing this is a "bombshell." Nothing they said is news to me. It's public knowledge that the government pays out millions of dollars a year for vaccine injuries. I am sure that among the people they compensate there are children who have been diagnosed with autism, but that since the scientific community has not yet identified a single, distinct cause of autism they cannot definitively blame the autism on the vaccines. So those children are probably compensated based on some other criteria, such as a brain injury related to vaccines, and the government frames the comorbidity between the brain injury and the autism as a coincidence.

I guess I am not seeing what, exactly, is "new" about this news?

[kijip]

As for the anchor, I thought he was saying "awards" the entire time, which would make sense considering the context. I agree that "rewards" would be totally inappropriate verbiage, and if he said that, it's ridiculous!

He says reward first, just after min 1:45, and then started saying award. Perhaps it was a slip of the tongue but it is a really poor one. He dwells on the amounts like somehow that proves something for a link in and of itself.

This is another example of media making a high drama news story where there is none. There is nothing shocking about the vaccine injury compensation program existing or paying families. That is what it is designed to do. Heck, its existence was on each of the info sheets I received for each vax my sons got.

I added the final sentence because I did not want anyone to think that I sided with the linkage. It is an inflammatory, overstated news piece with a clear opinion or rather sell/hype bias.

[BabyH]

It is no secret that the national vaccine injury compensation program has paid families whose children are injured by vaccines. I don't believe that this is a huge revelation. Vaccine injuries are rare, but they do happen and thus the fund. I am sure that some of the kids who received funds have autism but that does not mean that their vaccine injury was autism.

Also what the hell is wrong with that reporter? Calling such settlements, which are distributed for care and damages costs in pretty tragic outcomes "rewards" is outrageous.

I have no interest in engaging in a debate on a link between vaccines and autism. I feel confident that my choice to vax pretty much on schedule was the best choice for my family and public health.

Well said. The topic of vaccines is quickly becoming a taboo topic on my list of things not to talk about at a cocktail party.

ETA: However, I do like to read the threads about vaccines because I am interested in gaining knowledge about all sides of the debate (yes, the debate that I don't actually have with anyone...)

[kijip]

Well said. The topic of vaccines is quickly becoming a taboo topic on my list of things not to talk about at a cocktail party.

ETA: However, I do like to read the threads about vaccines because I am interested in gaining knowledge about all sides of the debate (yes, the debate that I don't actually have with anyone...)

Politics, sex, religion and now vaccines. :tongue5:

[geochick]

Interesting subject, but if it's a "Fox News Exclusive" I have a hard time taking it seriously. Have fun with this.

[AnnieW625]

Thank you for posting. From a media standpoint I thought the bit did a decent job of highlighting the facts. Everything on a major news network can be clarified a bombshell and I can see why the producers of the segment chose to call this a bombshell because it could be classified as one to a large majority of the Fox News Channel viewership (guessing between the ages of 48 to 65) who may not know (unless they have a child, family member or friend who have had some sort of ASD or characteristic of autism) of this program regarding settlements with the families of children who have had severe reactions or life threatening injuries due to vaccines.

[scrooks]

Still, if 1 in 38 children have traits of autism, it's time to revise our defintion of "normal".


That's exactly what I was thinking!

[JBaxter]

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/14611371

[dogmom]

:yeahthat:

As a side note. I saw on the ABC evening news a short blurb about study in Korea were they found the incidence of autism to be 1 in 38 children versus the 1 in 100 or so number that is commonly referenced.

The research found 1/38 prevalence, not incidence, which means the total number of people that have a given disease in a population. Incidence is the number of new cases. I have heard interviews/discussions with researches. The interesting thing is they found many kids that were doing fine in school, had no intervention, but fell on the autism spectrum disorder according to the screening tool they were using. If these numbers are any where near true in our population I would argue that it is evidence against the idea that there is an explosion of more kids with autism vs. more kids getting diagnosed with autism. I've always argues that many of the kids I was friends with fell into the ASD. (Sometimes I think they should put the question "Do you know who Gary Gaygax is?" into the screening for Aspergers.) I know a family of 13 children, I'm friends with the middle child. ALL of them are odd in sort of the same way, becomes apparent at any family gathering. One of them is a more traditional version of autism, having been put in an institution 40 years ago. But they all have various degrees of behaviors that probably fall on some check-off list. One sister has two children that have something going on with them, but they sort of defy diagnosis. I do know one Autism researcher that things a small amount of the increase incidence of Autism comes from an actual increase in autistic kids. She calls them "cubical babies", what happens when those on the more functioning level of the spectrum meet and have children. My personal opinion, which is worth nothing, is suffering from too broad of description and that it might help to break it up. Sort of like lumping depression with manic depression, that sort of thing. I suspect we will find these are different conditions, although they may have similar features.

[daisymommy]

I watched the whole live news coverage.
Unfortunately, I was not impressed as far as it being "a bombshell" or "breaking news". Well, maybe for some folks, but not for me or the people in science closely following the autism/vaccine debate.

It was the exact same thing I wrote this morning, before the news broadcast came on.

CDC Vaccine Injury Compensation Court has paid claims (court case winnings) for brain damage, seizures, & encephalopathy resulting from vaccine injury.
The majority of these kids all have autism.

Doctors and scientific community know that brain damage, seizures & encephalopathy can cause autism.

But this has been discussed before.

So while I do believe in the vaccine-autism connection, I'm not really sure why they felt that was new-news and irrefutable proof.

[JBaxter]

Yeah.. i saw no "bombshell" either. Most everything they said I already knew. I did agree its all in the wording. I do agree vaccine reactions can cause autism. If vaccine reactions can cause brain injuries to the point of seizure and mental retardation then why cant it cause other neuro conditions such as autism?

[StantonHyde]

Because I really think that the "causes" of autism are many. There's a recent study that shows correlation between how close to a freeway/highway a mother lived when she was pg and autism. (the closer to the freeway, the more likely the child would have autism)

And I think that's it--lots of correlation but not necessarily causation. Science and statistics are very careful to differentiate between the two-for good reason. I work in a place that treats a lot of autistic kids. And our managers, MDs, staff will all say that this increase goes beyond more diagnoses--there are definitely more kids who are squarely on the spectrum.

I do think the definition of "normal" is something that needs to be explored--I can think of lots of bright people who couldn't make eye contact and had other "odd" affects. I think those people would be diagnosed as having something like Aspergers today.