I usually avoid this topic because I am both a scientist and a mother of an autistic child and I don’t usually take a side in the debate on vaccines and autism. But I am today because I feel people need to see that in reality both sides have merit.
Let’s start with the parent point of view. For me, at least, it was easier thinking that his autism was a random fluke of nature – just one of those things. No parent likes the alternative – that they drove their child to the doctor’s office, and then held their child down so a stranger could inject a brain – inflaming substance into their young one that would forever change their life. Think about it. Do you really think parents want it to be vaccines? It is heart-wrenching. At times it can be psychologically overwhelming. I can’t see why anyone would choose to believe it if it didn’t have some basis for that line of thought.
Parents notice differences in their child closely following the MMR. The timing is right, the child has an initial onset of fever, and then new behaviors arise, coming on slowly, insipiently, one at a time in the weeks following. Don’t tell a parent they’re nuts for feeling there is a connection – they watched it occur. Something changed their child and it occurred shortly after a routine vaccination.
Now let’s look at the science. The number of autistic children is growing – at a substantial rate. The parents and communities are asking why? Hypotheses are put forth that something in the vaccine is harming the young brain and science sits up and takes notice. Vaccine or not the vaccine? Studies are devised to test the preservative – thimerosol. Thimerosol contains mercury, and yes, mercury is toxic to brain cells - a reasonable hypothesis. Yet, study after study finds no link to the thimerosol. OK, so it’s not the preservative, but one can not assume because the preservative was not the cause that the vaccine is harmless. It only shows that the preservative was not the cause.
Unfortunately, people have already taken sides and are now seeing only they want to see – the blinders are on large numbers of people on both sides. To move forward, we need the blinders to come off. Look at the relationship again and again – it’s there.
MMR was not given to my generation. I had each of those diseases as a child; measles, mumps, and rubella (German measles). These viruses are very contagious and can kill. According to the data the first 2 decades of vaccination prevented over 50 million cases of measles. Of these, over 17,000 infections would have resulted in mental retardation, and over 5,000 would have resulted in death. Mumps, which can result in male sterility after puberty and Rubella, which if contracted while pregnant can lead to congenital birth defects in the unborn child, also declined. Do we really want these nasty viruses to return to the levels prior to vaccination? Of course not! But we should not continue with present courses of vaccination knowing something is faulty in the vaccine preparation - that vaccinations to eradicate one disease has the potential to inflict another.
MMR is given as an attenuated vaccine. This means that live virus particles with very low virulence are injected into the child. This live, low virulence virus can still reproduce, but very slowly, allowing the immune system to acknowledge its presence and form antibodies against it. The viruses are grown in cell cultures allowing less virulent strains to be selected, or it can be mutated or genetically altered to get a less virulent strain. Unfortunately, it is not foolproof and a small chance exists that the virus could revert back to higher virulence. This is why attenuated vaccines cannot be given to individuals with a compromised immune system.
There are other, less risky ways of making a vaccine that only injects viral particles (just pieces). These other forms of vaccination also alert the immune system and cause the body to make the wanted antibodies. Why can’t one of these other vaccination types be investigated in studies and research?
The other problem could be in the mix. Three attenuated viruses are given in one injection. There should be studies on the risk of MMR compared to each given in a single dose, spaced apart (months preferred to weeks).
Now consider the latest research on the immune system abnormalities found in autistic children. Vaccinations with MMR began in the early 1970s. It was in the early 1970 that research on autism found an immunological correlation. Evidence has been increasing in this area showing there is some immune dysfunction in individuals with autism. More specifically, chemicals called cytokines - signaling molecules required to mediate specific types of immune responses are hyper-sensitive. This makes sense to me. Let me explain: a live virus damages neural (brain) tissue and this causes an inflammatory response. If the inflammatory response has been damaged (genetically or from the virus itself) then the damage can not be undone, at least not in the normal manner.
At 2-3 years old the brain is a very busy place, forming connections and linking up one area to another as learning progresses. Inflammation (from a virus?) causes damage to these connections. The brain must now make new connections. This is autism. In a child receiving the vaccine and for which the inflammation is handled correctly, the original connections are still intact. This is the normal child. I think an attenuated virus retaining too much virulence combined with (or causing) an immune system that has a faulty regulatory chemical is a reasonable hypothesis to investigate.
So, although I hate the debate and hate taking sides, I have decided to address this mess by saying that there is most likely truth to be found on both sides. Don’t bury your head in the sand, keep the blinders off, and keep reading the latest research. My bet is that in the end a correlation will be found vindicating both parents and scientists. I also hope both sides will find some much needed peace of mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment