Albert
Einstein made mistakes and misinterpreted data.
He
said that his own cosmological constant was a big
personal
embarrassment. He put it in, he took it out, he
died.
Now we think he was right to include it. It was all in
how
he changed his interpretation of his data.
|
Bohr side held that at a quantum level, particles were
undetermined until observed; the quantum world was one of probabilities, not
observable realities. Einstein retorted, “God does not play with dice.” They
both had the same data and they both agree on the data – it was the interpretation
that was being debated (Bohr turned out to be right).
Because of multiple interpretations, science doesn’t like to
say, “A caused B,” or even, “A correlates with B” unless they have the data to
prove it. Premature interpretation can lead to bad data, bad hypotheses, and bad
conclusions. And since so much of our culture today is based in science, bad
conclusions lead to bad policy.
This means that when NO data exists to support a
hypothesis, scientists have a duty to speak out against those making wild
assertions. Especially when it leads to dangerous conclusions and actions.
Vaccines causing autism is such a situation.
Just this week another scientific paper in the vaccine/autism controversy was withdrawn. A biochemical engineer named Hooker
took data from an older CDC study and reinterpreted it. The CDC study had found
no link between MMR vaccine and development of autism in children around two
years old. They had looked at many factors to see if it occurred in subsets of
patients as well, including race. But Hooker’s reanalysis showed that early MMR vaccination
in African American boys was related to higher incidence of autism.
Lies,
damn lies, and statistics. Do you really think organic
foods
cause autism? Well there’s the data. CORRELATION
DOES
NOT IMPLY CAUSATION.
|
For Hooker (the father of an autistic boy who he describes as "vaccine injured"), this meant taking a case control set of data and
running a different style of study with the data (a cohort study). Also, his
choice of statistical tests was wrong and he ended up comparing diagnosis at
different ages instead of vaccination age versus diagnosis. Of course he found
more autism diagnosis at 36 months than at 24 months – autism isn’t usually
diagnosed until about 36 months! A great discussion of flaws in this paper is found
here.
The vaccine/autism controversy started in the 1980’s, when
the Urabe strain of mumps was being used in the MMR. But this was related to
other brain lesions, not autism. Andrew Wakefield really got the ball rolling in a Lancet article in 1998. His conclusion was
that the triple vaccine was the culprit and it should be given one at a time –
anecdotally, the parent so his 12 subjects had said that autism started within
days of their vaccination around 14 months.
His co-authors withdrew their names when it became apparent
that something was hinky – he was getting paid by a law firm that was suing the
vaccine manufacturers (to the tune of a half million dollars). But he stuck by his guns. Then it
was discovered that he was a major investor in a company ready to roll out
vaccine-alternative products.
Then his data was reviewed in 2009 and was found
fraudulent. He had manipulated data, including changing tissue sample results and making
up parts of the histories of his child subjects. His license to practice
medicine was taken from him in 2010 and I can’t for the life of me figure out why
he isn’t in jail.
Anti-vaccine proponents say that vaccination
during the months before two years of age alters the development of the brain
and predisposes to autism spectrum effects. However, all the data on brain
development suggests that the alterations that lead to autism take place in utero either as a result of genetics,
trauma, or toxins – long before vaccination takes place.
a very recent paper that
links autism to defects in a protein (mTor) that works to cut back synaptic
connections in the developing brain. Too many connections leads to altered
brain function and all too often, autism. But these changes are prior to vaccination or around time of autism recognition.
Research using 1st birthday party videos shows
that many children show signs and symptoms of autism by 12 months, many months
before most parents see the signs and a full year before autism can be reliably
diagnosed. This may be a reason that people anecdotally link vaccines and
autism – parents note it about the time a good number of vaccines are given. Some parents see it later using videos and use this regression of ability to damn vaccines - but the mTor paper addresses this well.
Unfortunately, some parents have used the erroneous data to
draw a dangerous conclusion – they shouldn’t vaccinate their children. This has
led to outbreaks of whooping cough, measles, mumps and other preventable
diseases.
You might say that it doesn’t matter;
if some parents choose not to vaccinate, then they're only hurting their own kids - but that
isn’t so. For a small percentage of the population, especially the young and
old, vaccination may not work properly or completely. This doesn’t matter if
everyone vaccinates, because the presence of the disease in the population will
be so low that their chances of being exposed remain low.
Jenny
McCarthy has a son with autism. One can’t blame her
for
her initial conclusion that vaccines might have been
involved,
since fraudulent papers were out there. Now we
know
better, but she hasn’t altered her “view” (although
she claims she has). Too often, I think we look for
something
to blame.
|
Therefore, the “policy” of non-vaccination by some parents
is flawed, in that there's no evidence to support their reason for withholding
the vaccine, and because it injures other people in the community. Not a big deal? Mumps in adolescent and adult males can lead to sterility.
That isn’t scary enough? Then maybe it will be your child
who isn’t as protected as they should be and becomes one of the 150 people
a year who die each year of complications due to chickenpox, just because little
Johnny’s mother “concluded” that vaccines were dangerous.
Contributed by Mark E. Lasbury, MS, MSEd, PhD
I must say i enjoyed that. Thank you regarding submitting the following with us. Retain changing a lot more.
ReplyDelete