Before you go: Oh no, not another autism diary. I'd like to start out by pointing out that I'm trying hard to not disparage people that think they are doing what's best for their children by not getting them vaccinated. I am a parent and I understand this. There's an awful lot of information out there and trying to decide what is valid and what isn't can be a tedious process. I'm just as distrustful of authority as a lot of you are and have a healthy amount of skepticism about the establishment position on almost any issue. That being said I just can't see how, based on a large amount of recent evidence, one can reasonably maintain the position that vaccinations are dangerous. Especially in light of the recent work to identifiy genetic causes of autism and to diagnose autism at an earlier age.
Another diary by aravir weighed in on this... but I thought I'd elaborate a little more on the vaccine issue.
A team at UCLA compared the DNA of autistic people and non-autistic people. They found that most autistic people have a genetic variations in a gene that deals with the communication between cells.
The review showed that most autistic people have a genetic variation in a portion of their DNA that affects the way brain cells connect with one another. Scientists also reported a link between autism and small "mistakes" in another DNA segment involved with cell communication.
Both reports add weight to the idea that autism is related to problems with the way brain cells connect.
The number of participants was large and concentrated on families with multiple autistic children.
Using the largest population sample to date, the scientists systematically scanned the DNA of 3,100 individuals from 780 families nationwide. Each family had at least two autistic children.
The scan connected autism to a specific region of chromosome 5, which previous studies at UCLA and collaborating institutions had pinpointed as a hub for genetic variations linked to higher autism risk.
To verify the findings, Dr. Hakon Hakonarson at the Children's Hospital of Pennsylvania led the team in conducting a second scan on the DNA of 1,200 individuals from families affected by autism, as well as nearly 6,500 healthy controls. All participants shared European ancestry.
This is concrete evidence which pinpoints a genetic cause for autism.
Genetic research is also helping to identify other issues associated with autism. While I do not hold Jenny McCarthy in particularly high regard and I think she is doing more damage than good. Some of the things that she's talking about shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.
There is evidence that the gastrointestinal problems that plague many autistic people has a genetic cause. Some parents, Jenny McCarthy included, have found that autistic children do respond better to a change in diet. I think this is a great example of where listening to parents of autistic kids has lead to some concrete research.
"Gastrointestinal disorders don't cause autism. Autism is a disorder of brain development," Levitt says. "However, our study is the first to bring together genetic risk for autism and co-occurring GI disorders in a way that provides a biologically plausible explanation for why they are seen together so often."
A gene that deals with cell communication is also critical in the development and of the GI system. More research using diet to improve the quality of life for autistic people certainly needs to be done. I think this research, like this, that can identify and help mitigate symptoms associated with autism is the single most important thing autism research money can go to.
There is growing evidence that autism manifests itself far earlier than most people realize. Researchers at Vanderbilt, Yale University, and the University of Washington have been working on diagnosing autism at very early ages. The key here is that the earlier autism is detected, the better the outcome can be for the autistic child. I also see this as a blow to the claim that autism is linked to vaccinations or to too many vaccinations in a short period of time. The study at the University of Washington identifies at risk children at as early as 8 months old. This is 4 months before the recommended point for administering the MMR vaccination. One of the vaccines most often fingered by anti-vaccination advocates as a likely trigger for autism. The earlier the disease is diagnosed the less likely it becomes that it was triggered by some external cause.
Another point I'd like to address is a straw man argument that bothers me a lot. It's the "Big Pharma" argument. The argument you here sometimes hear from the anti-vaccination community goes like this: vaccines are pushed because they are so profitable. The truth is they are not. It would be FAR more profitable for the pharma companies to NOT cure disease outright, and instead charge large amounts of money for drugs that manage the symptoms over time.
Many pharmaceutical companies have stopped producing and researching vaccines because drugs like Lipitor or Viagra are far more profitable. Drugs like this are taken over and over and over again... rather than a vaccine which is used once, or maybe twice, and then never again. I am frankly shocked that the recent HPV vaccine was even introduced to the market. It's far more likely that if there was a conspiracy by "Big Pharma" it would be to suppress vaccines rather than produce them. Let me ask you: Why would a drug company want to produce and market a vaccine that they can charge only $20 that is used once and never again vs. a pharmaceutical like Lipitor or Viagra that they can charge $50 or more a month for and that you need to buy over and over and over again?
Vaccines represent a rediculously small portion of pharmaceutical sales.
Vaccines are a very small enterprise relative to the pharmaceutical industry overall: vaccine revenues constitute only about 1.5 percent of global pharmaceutical sales (Batson, 2001). Global sales of all vaccines combined are roughly equivalent to the individual sales of such familiar pharmaceutical products such as Lipitor, Prilosec, and Zocor (Marketletter, 2002). In just three decades, the number of firms supplying routine vaccines to the United States dwindled to 5 companies that produce all of the routinely recommended childhood and adult vaccines.
Vaccinations are also unprofitable for the doctor who is administering them. A recent survey found that some doctors were even considering dropping vaccinations for patients that had private insurance.
The same article offers some evidence about how unprofitable vaccinations are for doctors.
One example of the disparity was a vaccine that protects against pneumococcal disease. The per-dose difference ranged from a $40 profit to an $11 loss. A chickenpox vaccine netted some doctors $35 but cost others nearly $30 per dose.
The survey examined the cost of the vaccines and the expense of storage and related medical supplies. But it didn't look at administrative fees and staff time.
If vaccines are so profitable and "Big Pharma" wants your money so bad from vaccinations, why is the number of companies producing the vaccines shrinking and why are the sales of a drug like Prilosec greater than the total sales of ALL VACCINES WORLDWIDE?
Given this evidence it seems odd to me that vaccinations are pushed by Big Pharma because they are huge profit centers. It's just not true.
In the end, I just can't see, given the growing mountain of evidence, that one could conclude that vaccinations have any link to autism. The only solid evidence ever given that vaccinations have any corespondance to autism is that people started to recognize a problem with their child at about the same age that vaccinations are administered. A decade ago this might have been a resonable evidence to look at vaccinations more closely, but that work has been done now, and it is no longer resonable to use this as an excuse not to vaccinate your children. I understand the desire to look for an external culprit, a cause or trigger for the disease, but sometimes the truth is far simpler. Autism is a genetic disorder caused by a genetic variation and not some external agent introduced into the body. Things like diet certainly may reduce the symptoms of the disease and may improve the quality of life for autistic people, but they wont cure the disease. I wont say that the disease wont ever be cured, because I'm not smart enough to predict what science will be capable of in the future. What I do know is that continued attempts to pin the disease on an external force like vaccines are not helpful and divert money away from research that can ultimate improve the quality of life and care that autistic people recieve. Every dollar spent promoting the vaccination connection or some sort of miraculous cure for autism is a dollar that may keep an autistic person from reaching his or her full potential.
I do have an agenda here. I want what's best for my children and ultimately I think what's best for them is if everyone gets vaccinated. I don't want to get into an argument about why you are not vaccinating your child. You may, in fact, have perfectly a valid reason for not getting your child vaccinated. I'm just saying that based on this evidence I don't think autism is that reason. All I'm trying to do here is present some evidence that may aid in your decision to get your child vaccinated or not. And by presenting evidence that might lead other people to get their children vaccinated, hopefully, I am helping your kids, even if they aren't vaccinated.
Finally, I strongly believe that by getting your child vaccinated you are doing a service to your community and are helping to make the world a better place.