Empire of reason

The US government recently decided to compensate the parents of a girl who had developed autism-like symptoms shortly after receiving a series of immunizations as a young child. For people who believe that autism is caused by vaccines, this decision has been perceived as an important victory.

But to believe that this case provides evidence for a link between immunizations and autism is pure fantasy. Proponents of the vaccine-autism hypothesis have ignored the real reasoning behind this decision, just as they ignore the scientific evidence disputing their claims.

Terry and Jon Poling, the parents of the child involved in this case, explain that their daughter started to display a host of health problems a few days after receiving eight immunizations more than eight years ago. They claim that a mercury additive in the vaccines caused these problems and ultimately led to autism-like symptoms in their child. 

The Polings and their supporters argue that the vaccine-autism connection is proven by two main pieces of evidence: the similarities between symptoms of autism and those of mercury poisoning, and the increased rate of autism after the introduction of mercury containing vaccines in the 1970s. However, this support is scavenged from distorted historic trends and mischaracterized chemical effects. While it does not seem to sway the believers, a large body of scientific evidence and expert examination has firmly refuted these claims.

Mercury poisoning and autism do indeed have some similar symptoms, but the connection seems to stop there. Multiple controlled studies demonstrate that there is no difference in mercury levels between autistic children and those without the disorder. Researchers have also shown that mercury levels in vaccines were well below the federal safety limits.

In fact, a new study by the University of Rochester demonstrates that what little mercury is present in the vaccines is excreted from the body much faster than previously thought. The vaccine additive leaves the system more than ten times as fast as the mercury ingested from eating fish.

The historic correlation between autism and vaccines is a similarly faulty argument. Just because autism rates started to increase throughout the time when mercury additives were used doesn’t mean that these two events are related. You could just as easily draw this connection with the increase of greenhouse gas emission during this time or the proliferation of microwave ovens in US households.

Studies of children who received vaccines without the mercury additive further discredit this historic correlation. The rate of autism in Denmark has been increasing since they eliminated mercury from their vaccines fifteen years ago. California has also seen an increasing rate of autism since mercury was removed from their vaccines in 2001, and a nationwide study demonstrated that different levels of mercury additives had no effect on autism rates.

In 2005 the Chochrane Library did the most comprehensive review ever conducted of scientific literature on the autism-vaccine link. They found absolutely no credible evidence that supported this connection.

With so much evidence that refutes the link between vaccines and autism, why did the scientific community decide to compensate Terry and Jon Poling for their daughter’s struggle with autism? The answer is simple: they didn’t.

The Polings’ daughter suffers from a rare genetic disorder that affects mitochondrial function in the cell. The decision made by government officials is that the vaccines may have exasperated this underlying medical condition. The officials did not say that the vaccines caused autism, that they caused the mitochondrial disorder, or that the mercury additives were the culprit. 

Furthermore, this concession was made without the support of scientific evidence. There has been no research that demonstrates a link between vaccines and this mitochondrial disorder, and many researchers and public officials have condemned this decision as being baseless. The Center for Disease Control was quick to respond to this ruling by emphasizing that no scientific link between autism and immunizations exist.

It is important to examine our public health policies for risky practices, but insisting that this connection exists in the face of so much contrary evidence is absurd. It distracts the scientific community from exploring other causes, and deceives the public into believing that immunizations – which save countless lives every year – are dangerous.

    

References:

Mercury and autism

http://jcn.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/19/6/431

http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/pr/news/story.cfm?id=1848

Population studies of vaccines and autism

http://www.slate.com/id/2123647/

Review of scientific literature on autism-vaccine link

http://www.cochrane.org/press/MMR_final.pdf

 Responses from scientific community on compensation ruling http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Science/2008/03/07/doctors_defend_safety_of_vaccinations/8485/