Are Autism and Vaccines Linked?

Recommend (2) Comments (0)

The NAA claim that the:

"....science that says vaccines are not related to autism is based solely on large epidemiological, or statistical, studies"

This is incorrect. Taking the MMR hypothesis as an example, there are two clinical studies that establish that the MMR hypothesis is flawed. These are:

Afzal et al (2006)
Leukocyte preparations from children with documented evidence of MMR vaccination and confirmed diagnosis of autism were examined by several assays designed to target multiple regions of the measles virus genome sequence. No sample was found positive by any method. The assays applied were highly sensitive, specific and robust in nature, and were based on the amplification of measles virus RNA transcripts by real-time quantitative RT-PCR (QRT-PCR) as well as by conventional RT-PCR-nested PCR. The assays applied were potentially able to detect measles virus RNA down to single figure copy numbers per reaction. The amount of total nucleic acid extract of leukocytes subjected to various measles virus-specific investigations was several fold higher than minimally required of a sample where measles virus persistence is well documented. This study failed to substantiate reports of the persistence of measles virus in autistic children with development regression.

D'Souza et al (2006)
OBJECTIVES: Despite epidemiologic evidence to the contrary, claims of an association between measles-mumps-rubella vaccination and the development of autism have persisted. Such claims are based primarily on the identification of measles virus nucleic acids in tissues and body fluids by polymerase chain reaction. We sought to determine whether measles virus nucleic acids persist in children with autism spectrum disorder compared with control children. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were isolated from 54 children with autism spectrum disorder and 34 developmentally normal children, and up to 4 real-time polymerase chain reaction assays and 2 nested polymerase chain reaction assays were performed. These assays targeted the nucleoprotein, fusion, and hemagglutinin genes of measles virus using previously published primer pairs with detection by SYBR green I. Our own real-time assay targeted the fusion gene using novel primers and an internal fluorescent probe. Positive reactions were evaluated rigorously, and amplicons were sequenced. Finally, anti-measles antibody titers were measured by enzyme immunoassay. RESULTS: The real-time assays based on previously published primers gave rise to a large number of positive reactions in both autism spectrum disorder and control samples. Almost all of the positive reactions in these assays were eliminated by evaluation of melting curves and amplicon band size. The amplicons for the remaining positive reactions were cloned and sequenced. No sample from either autism spectrum disorder or control groups was found to contain nucleic acids from any measles virus gene. In the nested polymerase chain reaction and in-house assays, none of the samples yielded positive results. Furthermore, there was no difference in anti-measles antibody titers between the autism and control groups. INTERPRETATION: There is no evidence of measles virus persistence in the peripheral blood mononuclear cells of children with autism spectrum disorder.

These are backed up by the testimony of Stephen Bustin from the Cedillo hearings:

"What I immediately observed was that they had forgotten to do the RT step....If you detect a target that is apparently measles virus in the absence of an RT step by definition it can't be measles virus because it has to be DNA. It's a very simple concept. At least it is to me. It's not to everyone else...[b]ecause measles virus doesn't exist as a DNA molecule in nature, they cannot be detecting measles virus".

The NAA go on to say that conflicts of interest permeate all the science refuting the various autism/vaccine hypotheses. They fail to provide an convincing evidence of this - or in fact, any evidence at all.

We should possibly explore the conflict of interest claim from both sides. A conflict (as I understand it) exists when one person/organisation stands to gain or lose financially.

With that in mind we should review Andrew Wakefield's science as he has/had two financial stakes in establishing autism was caused by vaccines. Firstly, there was his MMR rival vaccine patent. If MMR was withdrawn, he stood to gain financially. Secondly, there is his Texas interest in Thoughtful House which treats autistic patients allegedly damaged by vaccines. If his MMR ideas continue to be disproven he stands to lose money.

And how about the Geier's financial interests in vaccines? They have an established sideline in appearing as professional witnesses in autism/vaccine cases. They also have an ongoing patent application (ironically with a Pharma company) for an autuism treatment based on the premise mercury and testosterone combine to cause or worsen autism. If the vaccine hypotheses continue to be refuted they stand to lose out financially.?

Laura Hewitson recently showed a poster presentation of an unpublished paper which she claimed demonstrates a link between vaccines and autism. Her husband works at Thoughtful House and it transpires she has a child registered in the Omnibus Autism proceedings. The paper itself was also comissioned by the Petitioners in those hearings. By no stretch of the imagination can she claim to be impartial or unconflicted.

The truth is that everyone in this debate has some sort of conflict and it really is a side issue. We should concentrate on the validity of the science presented ratehr than who is presenting it.