FEAT DAILY NEWSLETTER
Sacramento, California http://www.feat.org
November 30, 2000
Autism, MMR and 60 Minutes
Another Pediatrician’s Perspective
[This is from F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP TL Autism
Research in Falmouth, Massachusetts.]
The recent 60 Minutes program on MMR vaccine was an
excellent awareness-raising report on the debate surrounding regressive autism
and its explosion. What struck me most
are the following:
·
The tragic pictures of the little boy who opened the
show and his parents’ heart-breaking pain and suffering;
·
The beautiful mother, standing with her arm raised,
like most of the audience, because she believed her child was injured by the
MMR vaccine—caught crying by the scanning camera; and
·
Andrew Wakefield, sincere, truthful, principled, unassuming
and ready to sacrifice everything in the pursuit of the truth.
First, my background:
I am trained in infectious diseases and pediatrics. During my training I personally cared for
children and adults with serious and complicated contagious illnesses. I
subsequently “really” practiced pediatrics and was a school physician for 34
years. I personally administered my own
vaccines and enforced every Health Department mandate. I also informed myself thoroughly about
regressive or late onset autism. Because
of research I am now conducting, I strongly suspect that there is an autism-vaccine
connection (*below).
The following crucial facts were unfortunately not
discussed in the 60 Minutes piece:
·
The measles virus was isolated from the gut wall of
children with autism. It was further identified by very precise PCR techniques
by O’Leary, and was confirmed to be of vaccine origin by Kawashima and his
group.
·
Sixty new cases with autistic enterocolitis were
reported by
Wakefield in the September 2000 issue of the American
Journal of Gastroenterology.
·
Children with autism have statistically significant
co-existing high titers of MMR and Myelin Basic Protein antibodies (Singh).
The authorities like to repeat that Wakefield’s findings
have not been duplicated by other researchers.
This may be true for the case of children with autism but only because
no one has tried to. Indeed after
seeing the onslaught of attacks on Dr. Wakefield because of his research, it is
unlikely that anyone would want to.
Sabra et al at Georgetown University, however, have described identical
ileal lymphoid nodular hyperplasia in the guts of children with ADHD.
Thousands of parents believe that the MMR vaccine has
contributed to their children’s autism.
They have pictures and videos to prove the ‘before ’ and ‘after.’ They speak of the MMR being the only new
event in their child’s life in that period between normal development and
autistic regression. They point out
their children’s marked immune system dysfunction, something with which they
were not born.
These parents certainly did not acquire their conviction
from reading about the twelve cases reported in Dr. Wakefield’s first
paper. Nor would they simply be looking
for a scapegoat. Please remember, and
always remember, their children were normal and their disease is acquired. Regardless of how often the authorities
attest that the MMR vaccine is safe, an increasing number of parents here and
in Europe are refusing to believe them.
Safety trials not looking beyond 3 weeks post-vaccination convince no one. Equally alarming to the parents is the fact
that the infectious disease specialists and epidemiologists who make decisions
and mandate vaccines have little knowledge of autism and its immune etiology.
It is inevitable that the present intransigent and
unbending attitude of the vaccine authorities will lead to measles, mumps and
rubella outbreaks. When these diseases
return, and they will, the authorities—and the authorities alone—will have to
be held responsible. There is no reasonable
justification to tell a parent who is adamant about not using MMR but who is
willing to return three times for the monovalent vaccines, that they are simply
not available and/or illegal. Dr.
Wakefield only asked that more research be done into the triple live-virus
vaccine. To intimate that his research
will cause epidemics is a flagrant distortion of the truth.
It took us a long time to perfect the single (monovalent)
mumps, measles and rubella vaccines.
Most pediatricians and parents trusted them. Epidemics stopped and few adverse vaccine reactions were
reported.
When the MMR vaccine was licensed in 1971 and became
available shortly thereafter, many pediatricians refused to use it and
continued vaccinating with the monovalent products at 3-6 months
intervals. These pediatricians were
concerned with the potential decreased efficacy and increased side effects of
the combination. Many of us were also
aware that no long-term safety studies of the MMR vaccine were available, on
going or contemplated.
Two things happened simultaneously in the late seventies
to change things dramatically:
1.) HMOs arrived
on the scene and cut down the number of “regular check-ups” 2.) The State Health Departments started
providing the vaccines free of charge to the practicing pediatricians and GPs.
The Health Departments made it clear that it was cheaper to buy and easier to
store and distribute the 3 in 1 vaccine and, on that basis, simply mandated its
use. Pediatricians had no choice but to
comply.
To say that we are not sure the parents will bring the
child back for subsequent shots is false.
Certainly this argument could be made in a third world country but
certainly not in the West. Any “practicing” pediatrician knows that a parent is
much more likely to keep a doctor’s appointment if a vaccine is due. One must be cautious not to insult parents’
intelligence.
Secondly, to say that added injections will cause pain and
discomfort to the child is ridiculous.
I believe that the pain caused by an aqueous injection administered
sub-cutaneously by an experienced health professional does not even come close
to the living hell of Autism.
Interestingly, the only people who raise these two
arguments are members of vaccine boards and committees and rarely treat
patients. Wouldn’ t it be more
appropriate to have the parents make that important choice if they have such
marked reservations? After all it is
their child. As well, it seems
hypocritical to mention pain when the vaccine authorities are introducing new
vaccines of questionable efficacy and safety all the time It was intimated on
60 Minutes that a multitude of studies involving large populations has proved
that the MMR vaccine was perfectly safe and did not cause autism. THIS IS NOT TRUE. There is NO long-term safety research proving that MMR does not
cause autism. There is a sole
epidemiological study by Taylor et al, often publicized as proving decisively
that autism did not increase in the UK after 1988, when MMR was introduced with
great fanfare. This study was financed
and ordered by The Medicines Control Agency and The Public Health Laboratory
Service.
A noted British statistician whose specialty is medical
research, looked carefully at the Taylor study. He wrote: “A myth is
being created that the Taylor et al study shows that MMR is not triggering
autism. The evidence presented in their Lancet paper is [in fact] consistent
with the MMR triggering a substantial proportion of autism cases in this North
London population. The study does not
find evidence to support an association between MMR and autism onset because of
a flaw in the study design. This does
not mean that such an association does not exist.”
The reason for this expert’s comments is that the “case
series design” used in the Taylor study is well known to be statistically
unsatisfactory for chronic conditions and inadequate for a small sample (293
confirmed cases). Even the authors of
the study themselves alluded to its methodological problems.
At times, while figures clearly demonstrate an increase in
autism, this fact is denied in the written text. At others, contradictions are evident:
·
“There is uncertainty about whether the prevalence of
autism is increasing,” immediately followed by: “Our study is consistent with
an increase in the incidence of autism in recent birth cohorts.”
·
“For age at first parental concern, no significant
temporal clustering was seen for cases of core autism and atypical autism, with
the exception of a single interval within 6 months of MMR vaccine associated with
a peak in reported age of parental concern at 18 months,” and “Our results do
not support the hypothesis that MMR vaccination is causally related to autism.”
By far, however, the Taylor study’s most serious problem
was to look only at children born after 1987.
This effectively excluded all children born in 1986-87 and initially
vaccinated in 1988 or later. It also
excluded all 2–5 year old children previously non- or partially immunized and
who received MMR boosters in 1988 or later.
More importantly, this design flaw added all excluded children to the
opposite group. Last but not least, Dr.
Taylor has repeatedly refused to let anyone see his raw data, in the
hopes of replicating his findings, thus becoming probably the first author in
the history of the Lancet to do so.
The ‘authorities’ need to get away from rhetoric. They must look at and commission real
science to support their claims. Until
the safety of the MMR vaccine is proved conclusively, it will be wise to allow
parents a choice between the single vaccines and the trivalent MMR. All of us who have been touched by the
autism epidemic appreciate the efforts put forth by CBS and 60 Minutes. We hope that numerous and more balanced,
informative programs will follow.
>> SUBSCRIBE << Emailed to you Daily no
cost:
Send Your United Way Contributions to FEAT
Put “16106” on your Donor Card
Or: FEAT PO Box 255722 Sacramento CA 95865
LETTERS to the EDITOR:
| NEWS EDITOR: |
NEWS SEARCH:
FEATBack@list.feat.org | FEAT@feat.org | www.feat.org/search/news.asp
* JOIN News Talk LIST: FEATBack-subscribe-request@LIST.FEAT.ORG *
Editor: Lenny Schafer | Eastern Editor: |
News Wire: Ron Sleith
schafer@sprynet.com |
Catherine Johnson PhD | News: Kay Stammers