THE Scottish parliament looks set to rattle the cages of
complacent health ministers and officials this week with a report recommending
that parents should not be forced to give children the controversial triple MMR
vaccine and should be allowed instead to opt for single vaccines.
This will be the first big dent in the official hard line
that MMR is the safest way to protect children and single doses are not an
option. If Scottish parents are allowed to choose single vaccines, it will be impossible
to stop the practice elsewhere in the UK.
Meanwhile, three new pieces of research looking at
vaccines and autism or both are likely to force even more parents away from the
measles, mumps and rubella jab.
The first, by researchers at the Royal Free Hospital in
London, has found that some children with regressive autism suffer a unique
leaky gut syndrome, not found in non-autistic children or children with known
forms of gut and bowel disorder.
The suggestion arising from the study of 68 children over
a two-year period is that an immune process is damaging the gut and that
further investigation should focus on researching immune reactions in the gut, rather
then concentrating - as most autism research currently is _ on genetics.
Elsewhere, in the Journal of Paediatrics, other work
suggests that such leaky guts allow partially digested food to enter the
bloodstream and toxic material to cross the blood-brain barrier - which is akin
to giving the brain a huge shot of morphine. Yet, more work in the US, Japan
and the UK which has found a rogue measles virus in the blood or guts of many
of the children with both autism and the rare gut disorder suggests there may
be a link with vaccination.
The second new study, by two researchers at the University
of Minnesota, did explore immune reactions in children with regressive autism.
Although only a small study of 35 autistic children were compared with 27 “normal”
children, they found the autistic children_s immune systems acted abnormally
when subjected to outside triggers like vaccines, virus and food. In other
words, in a number of vulnerable children a vaccine could send their immune
system into overdrive. “These results may partly explain apparent association
between the onset of regression/autistic behaviour and immunisation in these
children,” say the researchers.
There are still no signs, however, that health officials
in Britain are changing their minds. Only last month the committee on the
safety of medicines reiterated support for MMR, and in an attempt to influence
the wavering Scottish parliamentarians, six Scottish medical institutions issued
a press release reporting that the “overwhelming weight of scientific evidence
on MMR, including the world_s largest study of the vaccine, reaffirms its
safety”.
As the Eye detailed in January, the world_s biggest study
(carried out in Finland) does no such thing. And nor do several other studies
cited by the committee.
Perhaps health officials should listen to the American
Institute of Medicine. Research carried out for it by George Washington
University looked at 60 scientific papers covering MMR, measles vaccine, autism
or bowel disease to see if they supported the concerns first raised here by Andrew
Wakefield at the Royal Free in 1998 of a possible link between MMR and rare
regressive autism and gut disease (see Eyes passim).
The American researchers looked at papers cited by the UK
health officials and ministers to rubbish Dr Wakefield _ and decided that they
do not help the debate one way or another.
They conclude: “Furthermore, the studies commonly cited in
response to Wakefield typically address either other vaccines or other outcomes
or both, so even if well done would not really refute the Wakefield hypothesis.
Thus... the evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship
between MMR and autism.” So far.
ALL
INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR
GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE
KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED
AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO
VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU
ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.