Meet the Press links � Sunday, August 7 - Meet the Press, online at MSNBC - MSNBC.com
Meet the Press links � Sunday, August 7 - Autism/Thimerosal Debate
If you missed this interview, I would urge you to visit the MSNBC website and watch it there. I would also urge you to visit the Institute of Medicine website and at least check out the brief report.
After reading the brief, it was apparent to me that this study was much less about autism and more about determining the safety of the MMR vaccination containing thimerosal. Ultimately, the report concludes that the epidemiological studies were at a disadvantage, but that it was the best science they had to work with. And since measles, mumps and rubella are life threatening diseases (and potentially epidemic in nature), the threat of death and potentially deadly epidemic outweighs the non-life threatening disorder of autism. If I read it wrong, please feel free to disagree.
Then to see Dr. Fineberg being so clearly defensive. Not necessarily in his demeanor, but certainly in the verbiage he used. Consistently defending the epidemiology and the fact that the group of volunteers receive no compensation. He did little to answer the direct questions, skirting the issue, and claiming that the epidemiological studies show that there is no link between thimerosal and autism. Which is not what it says (exactly)... What it says is that "The evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship at the population level between MMR vaccine and autistic spectrum disorders" and "A consistent body of epidemiological evidence shows no association at a population level between MMR and ASD". So let's do some math here, shall we?
The latest figure that everyone is using is that 1/166 children are being diagnosed with autism. That means that if all of these studies combined surveyed 100,000 people, only 600 or so autistics would be represented. It would seem to me that 600 out of 100,000 could not determine anything at a population level. Clearly, if this was effecting us at the population level, the reported cases would be considerably higher that 1 in 166. Combine that with the fact there is the possibility that some children develop the disorder through genetic disposition, and the number of kids effected by thimerosal is even lower. Then the report goes on to suggest that "available funding for autism research be channeled to the most promising areas". In other words: "We know that the general population is more at risk by not getting vaccinated, so let's not spend any more time trying to see if thimerosal is linked to the massive spike in reported autism cases."
My favorite exchange came here:
MR. RUSSERT: You're absolutely convinced there's no connection
between thimerosal and autism?
DR. FINEBERG: I'm convinced that the best evidence all points to the
lack of an association. These studies can never prove to the point
of absolute certainty an absence of an association. But I would say
this, other avenues of research looking at other possible causes
today are much more promising ways to spend our precious resources.
In other words, "No, and the IOM is done looking."
The transcript from the interview is here.
The video on MSNBC.com is here.
If you missed this interview, I would urge you to visit the MSNBC website and watch it there. I would also urge you to visit the Institute of Medicine website and at least check out the brief report.
After reading the brief, it was apparent to me that this study was much less about autism and more about determining the safety of the MMR vaccination containing thimerosal. Ultimately, the report concludes that the epidemiological studies were at a disadvantage, but that it was the best science they had to work with. And since measles, mumps and rubella are life threatening diseases (and potentially epidemic in nature), the threat of death and potentially deadly epidemic outweighs the non-life threatening disorder of autism. If I read it wrong, please feel free to disagree.
Then to see Dr. Fineberg being so clearly defensive. Not necessarily in his demeanor, but certainly in the verbiage he used. Consistently defending the epidemiology and the fact that the group of volunteers receive no compensation. He did little to answer the direct questions, skirting the issue, and claiming that the epidemiological studies show that there is no link between thimerosal and autism. Which is not what it says (exactly)... What it says is that "The evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship at the population level between MMR vaccine and autistic spectrum disorders" and "A consistent body of epidemiological evidence shows no association at a population level between MMR and ASD". So let's do some math here, shall we?
The latest figure that everyone is using is that 1/166 children are being diagnosed with autism. That means that if all of these studies combined surveyed 100,000 people, only 600 or so autistics would be represented. It would seem to me that 600 out of 100,000 could not determine anything at a population level. Clearly, if this was effecting us at the population level, the reported cases would be considerably higher that 1 in 166. Combine that with the fact there is the possibility that some children develop the disorder through genetic disposition, and the number of kids effected by thimerosal is even lower. Then the report goes on to suggest that "available funding for autism research be channeled to the most promising areas". In other words: "We know that the general population is more at risk by not getting vaccinated, so let's not spend any more time trying to see if thimerosal is linked to the massive spike in reported autism cases."
My favorite exchange came here:
MR. RUSSERT: You're absolutely convinced there's no connection
between thimerosal and autism?
DR. FINEBERG: I'm convinced that the best evidence all points to the
lack of an association. These studies can never prove to the point
of absolute certainty an absence of an association. But I would say
this, other avenues of research looking at other possible causes
today are much more promising ways to spend our precious resources.
In other words, "No, and the IOM is done looking."
The transcript from the interview is here.
The video on MSNBC.com is here.
posted by Dwight @ 5:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home