The Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism (TPGA) is the book and website we wish had been available when our children with autism were first diagnosed.

Autism misinformation clouds and is perpetuated by the Internet. We want to make accurate information about autism causation and therapies visible, accessible, and centralized.

Think of us as a little bit of Snopes for the autism community — trusted, accurate, and friendly.  Our essays will cover informed approaches to autism and autism treatments, as well as the personal experiences of people with autism and their families.

I’m adding them to the blog roll (the badly in need of updating blog roll, yeah, that one).  While I was perusing the site, one personal post by Devon Koren Asdell caught my eye.  She writes that she is positive vaccines did not cause her own child’s autism:

For some reason (I’m assuming due to the controversial and heated nature of the discussion), many people, upon learning that Aisling is autistic, ask me if I believe her early childhood vaccinations caused the condition. My answer to this is always, emphatically, “no.” Aisling did receive all of her vaccinations on time, and would occasionally become slightly feverish and irritable after those first few sets, but I personally never saw any evidence that Aisling regressed in development, nothing that seemed out of the ordinary compared to the little checklist of probable side-effects that the health department sent home with us.

Not wanting to offend anyone who might believe otherwise, Asdell offers this disclaimer:

I’m not about to try to “prove” or “disprove” that childhood vaccinations cause autism in children. What I am absolutely certain of, however, is that childhood vaccinations did not cause autism in my own child.

The accounts of her memories of her baby being “different” are poignant:

Once I knew what the symptoms were, I was able to backtrack through Aisling’s life and see evidence of the disorder everywhere. I could remember how difficult it was to get her to breastfeed when she was a small baby, because she seemed to dislike being snuggled up to me. I remembered how I’d heard all these stories about how breastfeeding brought you closer to your child, because they’d make eye-contact with you, interact with you, “bond” with you during those early moments. I remembered feeling like I must have been doing something wrong, or that she simply wasn’t interested in me, because she would actively avoid eye contact with me when I was breastfeeding her, and would only eat when she was very, very hungry or when she wanted to go to sleep. I remember feeling as if I was just a “food machine” a lot of the time — Aisling really only seemed interested in interacting with me when she wanted something and couldn’t get it.

While Asdell is very, very careful not to step on the toes of anyone reading her personal account, she does offer this at the end of her post:

Autism didn’t “happen” to her; autism is very much a part of who she is, who she’s always been. I feel she’s imperfectly perfect just as she is, and I wouldn’t change that for the world.

This is a sentiment I’ve come across a few times, that considering a child “different” rather than “damaged” is actually much better for the parent and empowering for the child.  While Asdell herself would not come out and say this, viewing these kids as damaged probably has severe negative impacts on parents’ emotional states, in addition to lowering vaccination rates.

Jamie Bernstein went to an anti-vaccination rally in Chicago and wrote about it on Friendly Atheist.

My favorite part was when she got her picture taken with Andrew Wakefield and slipped him this note, asking him to read it later:

Dear Andrew Wakefield,

I know that you truly believe that what you are doing is helping people and that the ends justify the means, but I just want you to know that the things you are doing –- the actions you have taken in the past have hurt people –- killed people. Your work has scared and manipulated parents into not vaccinating their children, putting them and their entire community at risk, all in the name of safety. Children have died because of you. I just want to make sure that you fully understand that.

Sincerely,
Jamie

Great post, lots of amazing details, just a stunning (and disturbing) read.  Wow, Jamie.  Well done!

Wakefield is appearing to promote his new book and to attempt to defend his name, as he was just stripped of his license to practice medicine in the UK.

A disciplinary panel of the General Medical Council (GMC) found that Wakefield had acted in a “dishonest,” “misleading” and “irresponsible” way during his research.

During the interview, Wakefield says that his study has been replicated in 5 countries. It hasn’t. And, he also repeats many times how the U.S. has been quietly settling autism/vaccine cases so that must mean he’s right. Yes, some autistic kids were compensated in vaccine court. But, that tide has turned now that the science has caught up. Some think it’s pretty ballsy for Wakefield to even use this argument:

The “US Government acknowledges that vaccines cause autism” argument gets even stranger when you consider that Mr. Wakefield is speaking. The US Government, through the vaccine court, declared in three separate test cases (for example, the Cedillo case) that Mr. Wakefield’s hypotheses on MRR/measles virus/persistent infection/autism are wrong. Not just wrong, “not even close”. The idea that Mr. Wakefield would use the decisions of the court to defend himself is amazing in its brazenness. “Amazing in his brazenness” is pretty much expected from Mr. Wakefield.

In other vaccine news, a new study came out confirming that the number of vaccines children receive at one time is not a problem. (We knew this already, but a great explanation of why was posted on Quackwatch by two doctors.) Many parents worry that their infant’s system will be “overwhelmed” by too much medicine at one time, so they delay or skip vaccinations. No need, says the research.

The new study looked at 1,000 preteens who had undergone extensive memory, IQ, attention, and language tests. Then, the results were broken into two groups: Kids who received vaccines on schedule and those who did not. The results found that children given vaccines on schedule were not affected mentally later in life. And, interestingly, the group of children who had delayed or skipped vaccines “never did better in any analysis.”

In fact, when comparing kids who had received the largest number of vaccines as toddlers against those who had received the smallest, the first group scored higher on 15 out of 42 tests.

But when the researchers took factors such as parents’ education level into account, that difference disappeared for all but two tests. And for those, the difference was minimal, Smith said.

So vaccinate, and vaccinate on schedule.

So, I wanted to look at this story from the beginning and see if there really is any evidence here that the bastards are out to kill our kids.

On March 22nd, the FDA issued a statement recommending that physicians temporarily suspend use of Rotarix, because components of an extraneous virus were found in the vaccine. The statement stressed, “There is no evidence at this time that this finding poses a safety risk.”

The extraneous components were DNA from porcine circovirus 1 (PCV1), a virus not known to cause illness in humans or other animals.

On May 14th, the FDA issued an update on the rotavirus vaccine situation:

Within the last two months, FDA became aware of the presence PCV1 in Rotarix and DNA from PCV1 and PCV2 in RotaTeq. These viruses are not known to cause any infection or illness in people. Based on a careful review of a variety of scientific information, FDA has determined it is appropriate for clinicians and public health professionals in the United States to use these vaccines. All available evidence supports the safety and effectiveness of Rotarix and RotaTeq, which have been extensively studied, both before and after approval.

Unfortunately, the temporary suspension, followed by an all clear signal, has been interpreted by some already suspicious of vaccines as some kind of botched cover-up job.

For now, the most reassuring item about this news is this:

…GlaxoSmithKline detected the presence of DNA from PCV1 in the working cell bank and viral “seed” used to produce Rotarix, confirming that the material has been present since the early stages of product development, including during clinical studies.

So extra pig virus parts have been in the vaccine all along, and there haven’t been any issues. Even though it doesn’t sound good, it hasn’t hurt anybody.

But that same reassuring news is also the most unnerving, since it naturally leads to the question about how the extra pig virus got into the vaccine in the first place:

At this time, FDA does not know how DNA from PCV1 came to be present in Rotarix. FDA and GlaxoSmithKline are investigating this question.

Not the best answer. I mean, how could this happen? Was somebody eating a pulled pork sandwich over the vaccine vat or what? So I admit it’s not the best thing to hear. I will be very interested to see what Science Based Medicine and Orac have to say about this story. I have not been able to find information about how pig virus even gets into a batch of vaccine.

But maybe it gets in there the same way it does in every workplace. You know, someone brings their pet pig to work, and things get crazy.

I don’t know. Could it be a simple lack of hand washing? I’m all ears. If anyone has info, dish. And when I say dish, I mean a dish of ham sandwiches, please.

For those still suspicious, it might help to know that over in Europe, the extra virus pork raised less of an alarm:

Unlike the FDA, the European Medicines Agency “concluded that no action was necessary at this point” because “the findings do not present a public health threat.

That’s right, in Europe, the land where they are superior to us, have more home births, and different vaccine schedules in some countries, they just kept right on using Rotarix. The pig stuff didn’t bother them. Oh, sure, they were a little put off by just how it happened, though:

Still, the EMA added, “It is nonetheless clear that viral DNA should not be present in the vaccine and that its source is unclear,” and therefore requested GSK “to provide further information as a matter of urgency.” Similarly, the World Health Organization did not recommend change of the use of the vaccine.

So even WHO didn’t suspend the vaccine. But a little bit of a scold there. I mean that’s not cool, GlaxoSmithKline. Tell your lab techs to wash their hands post Baconnaise, will you?

(I am obviously kidding here. I really have no earthly idea how this could have happened, so I’m just naming all my favorite foods.)

Hey, I could be wrong. I often am. But it looks like appropriate measures were taken here, and it seems that there is actually nothing to fear. But of course, that is never a good enough answer for many people. Paranoia and mistrust run very high on the subject of vaccines.

I had an exchange recently in which someone said that “they” can’t have it both ways. (They being you know, the man or the guys in charge or the ones collecting the checks for giving us toxins or whatever.) You can’t say that swine flu will be a huge killer but then tell us that the extra pig virus is nothing to worry about. To this person, I guess the fact that pigs were somehow involved in both stories, and one pig virus was potentially harmful, but one wasn’t, well, that was a big red sign saying that corporate interests must be involved here. These companies just want to make money giving you vaccines, one way or another. They will get those pig parts into you and turn a profit. That is really a paranoid leap of logic. And I know it’s a leap many people will make, and I know they will be encouraged to make that leap by lots and lots of conspiracy mongering internet noise. It’s a shame.

So here’s the deal. This vaccine represented about 1% of GSK’s profit in 2009. Sure, it was millions of dollars, but not the billions that come from other drugs. It looks like GSK did inform the public and the FDA in a timely fashion, and they suspended their product pending an investigation. To me, this doesn’t look like a company that was involved in a massive coverup. I suppose there is a chance that this could be the case, but it seems the real casualty at the moment is once again consumer confidence.

Yes, pharmaceutical companies are motivated by profit, but that doesn’t mean they’re out to hurt your kid for cash. That’s not a great business model.

For an excellent primer on vaccines, please visit Science Based Parenting. If you’ve found this article because you are concerned about the pig virus story, and that concern has led you to buy the anti-vaccine hype, take a breath and read Colin’s information. He gives a great overview of the basics with loads of links to scientific information.

Since the start of this year, 219 people have contracted pertussis, and two have died. Both deaths were infants, under 3 months old. One in L.A. county and the other in Fresno county. It’s an alarming number, health leaders say, because at this time last year, there were only 118 cases statewide.

I picked up a brochure the last time we went to the pediatrician. It was all about how adults should get the pertussis vaccination again. Adults are actually susceptible to whooping cough, since our vaccinations have worn off. Unfortunately, with the drop in vaccination rates among children, this means that kids are more vulnerable to being infected by adults. While adults very rarely die of pertussis, it might be fatal to infants who come into contact with adult carriers.

After reading this frightening article, I will not be putting off that vaccination for myself.

Even with this decision, Dr. Offit said, “it’s very hard to unscare people after you’ve scared them.”

It is believed the current outbreak, the biggest since 2006, began when an eleven-year old boy returned from a visit to England back in June. (Britain, along with other parts of Europe, is experiencing a mumps renaissance.) He then attended a summer camp where other children were exposed to the illness. The bad news is that even kids who have two doses of the MMR vaccine under their belts are falling ill.

About 88 percent of those who reported their vaccination status had received at least one dose of vaccine, and three quarters of those infected had been given two doses.

The mumps virus can mutate, so people who have had only one or even two doses of vaccine remain vulnerable.

In addition, the vaccine isn’t 100% effective.

Studies have found one dose 73 percent to 91 percent effective, while the effectiveness of two doses ranged from 79 percent to 95 percent, according to the report.

“That means if you were to expose 100 people to mumps, 10 of them might still come down with the disease,” [study co-author and CDC epidemiologist Kathleen] Gallagher said. In this outbreak, these percentages are holding, she added.

No one has died from the current outbreak, and only a small number have been hospitalized. The outbreak is also fairly localized: Ninety-seven percent of those are children from an orthodox Hasidic Jewish group. So, there’s certainly no need for panic. But, as a parent who follows the vaccination schedule, these outbreaks are annoying. In the early 2000s, the MMR vaccine kept the number of U.S. mumps cases under 500 a year. After the misinformation about the MMR vaccine and autism, cases of the mumps started to spike. In 2006, there was a large outbreak in the Midwest and over 6,000 people were affected. It’s a shame when herd immunity starts to erode.

We can only hope that parents will now choose to immunize on schedule and that outbreaks like this will no longer happen.

(The picture is of my son’s leg after getting his vaccinations)

Andrew Wakefield kicked off the anti vaccination movement with his paper published in 1998 that claimed to show a link between Autism and vaccines. His  findings  have been proven false over and over again. It was also found that he most likely faked his data.

Last week  the UK’s General Medical Council found that Andrew Wakefield acted “dishonestly and irresponsibly” when doing his research. And now The Lancet (who published the paper) has issued a full retraction.

This is very good news and I hope that this will help put parents concerns about vaccinating their children to rest.

In other news, Bill Gates has committed $10 Billion (yes Billion!)  to develop and deliver vaccines to children in the developing world. “We must make this the decade of vaccines,” said Bill Gates. “Vaccines already save and improve millions of lives in developing countries. Innovation will make it possible to save more children than ever before.”

I get a daily email from the American Council on Science and Health called “Health Facts and Fears”. In that news letter Dr Gilbert Ross is quoted as saying of Bill Gates, “We must give credit to him for taking a very effective, targeted, lifesaving approach to charitable giving as opposed to activists, who prefer to wage irrational attacks on substances that have no nexus with human health.”

I’m a Mac girl but this makes me want to buy a PC!

If you go, put some comments on the pro side. I understand that this site wants to present a balanced argument, but is it balanced if one side is simply wrong about their facts?