FDA approves infant vaccine for diarrhea virus

mandana · Feb 10, 2006

The ASA is hardly the voice of authority, but if you're going to bring them into it, at least make sure you have the facts about what they have to say.
The question regarding a relationship between vaccines and autism continues to be debated. In 2001, an investigation by a committee of the Institute of Medicine concluded that the "evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship.... between MMR vaccines and autistic spectrum disorders (ASD)." The committee however, acknowledged that "they could not rule out" the possibility that the MMR vaccine could contribute to ASD in a small number of children. While other researchers agree the data does not support a link between the MMR and autism, they also agree more research is clearly needed. http://www.autism-society.org/site/PageServer?pagename=WhatisAutism#TheoriesOnCauses
Other major autism research and support organizations have to say. Cure Autism Now (CAN) and NAAR both believe there may be a link, and Defeat Autism Now (DAN) was basically formed on that premise.

Well, I just read the entire CAN website, and there's nothing there that makes me think it's a tenet they hold dear. And since DAN was formed on that premise (in your words), they certainly can't be considered objective.

The reason I included the link to ASA was because of the statement you highlighted, and I stand by citing it.

Amanda

LydiaNN · Feb 10, 2006

The reason I included the link to ASA was because of the statement you highlighted, and I stand by citing it.
Amanda

Okaaaaaaaaaaaaay..... What you said is that they don't seem to give much credence to a link between mercury and autism. The organization itself didn't actually come and say anything about its stand (I am a member and happen to know that they don't take official stands on things like this; they think taking a position on such a violatile issue would be divisive). But they have cited researchers that feel more research is needed.

Oh, and btw. Straight off of CAN's website:

Q: Where does Cure Autism Now stand on issues like whether or not vaccines cause autism?

A: Because the cause of autism is unknown, it is difficult to take a position on certain issues such as vaccinations - although it is clear to our organization that there needs to be more research and a large-scale investigation into this issue.

We recognize that there are supporters of our organization with strong feelings about this topic. Please check out our "Frequently Asked Questions about Autism" page and our Resources section for information pertinent to both sides of the issue.

I also didn't say that the theory is a tenet CAN holds dear. You're spinning that one out of whole cloth. I said that they believe there may be a link. I'm not sure you do much to bolster your point by misquoting those who happen to disagree with you. After all, my post and exactly what I said is right there in black and white for anyone to read! I hope that we can at least agree that these organizations wouldn't be suggesting that there is a need for more research if they were discounting the theory outright.

michelej · Feb 10, 2006

I'm not sure about the need for another vaccine for children without any chronic health conditions; however, I think this would probably be a very good idea for kids at risk. Rotavirus can be very serious- in 2000 my 3 year-old and 10 month old twins all had it at the same time. One of the twins was hospitalized twice for one night each time and my 3 year old ended up in the hospital for 5 days because he became so dehydrated. My kids were otherwise healthy, so I can imagine how bad this disease could be in a child with other conditions.

mandana · Feb 10, 2006

I hope that we can at least agree that these organizations wouldn't be suggesting that there is a need for more research if they were discounting the theory outright.

Of course we can! Or, it might also be because:

they think taking a position on such a violatile issue would be divisive).

And just for the record, I never misquoted you. In fact, I wasn't posting to you at all - I was posting in regards to the mercury issue brought up in another post. In regards to being in disagreement with you, let me make myself very clear: I do not purport to be any sort of authority on the issue. I do think the issue becomes quite fuzzy at times because people get very emotional and those emotions can cloud what research bears out.

This frightens me because people are choosing not to vaccinate their children and this is not based on hard research that they have done, but rather on inflammatory, emotional observations by people who are, understandably, emotional about the issue.

LydiaNN · Feb 10, 2006

Of course we can! Or, it might also be because:
And just for the record, I never misquoted you. In fact, I wasn't posting to you at all - I was posting in regards to the mercury issue brought up in another post. In regards to being in disagreement with you, let me make myself very clear: I do not purport to be any sort of authority on the issue. I do think the issue becomes quite fuzzy at times because people get very emotional and those emotions can cloud what research bears out.
This frightens me because people are choosing not to vaccinate their children and this is not based on hard research that they have done, but rather on inflammatory, emotional observations by people who are, understandably, emotional about the issue.

In post #85, my post is quoted by you. That means you were posting to me, or at least that you should have known I would assume you were addressing me directly. Otherwise, why on earth pull my post into it at all??? Again, with the right there in black and white for all to see.... And yes, the issue is fuzzy, but it certainly doesn't become less so when people claim that statements were made that were never made (as in when you claimed that I said the vaccine question is a tenet of CAN), or purport that this organization or the other has taken a stand that they haven't, in fact, taken. And the few parents that I have known who have foregone vaccinating their children completely, did not make the decision based on inflammatory or emotional 'observations'. They have either witnessed their child's deterioration after the first dose of the MMR, or have an older child with autism that they feel was caused by a vaccination. Disagreeing with them is fine, but assuming that these people didn't think long and hard about their choice is an outright fallacy. Many others have chosen to separate out the vaccinations, and have their child receive each shot individually, usually at their own expense, since insurance will only cover the 'package' deal. Are these parents also making their decisions based on the 'inflammatory, emotional observations' or do they pass your litmus test for being capable of making rational, well informed decisions?

kids · Feb 10, 2006

Actually, I do believe that most (if not all) vaccines still do contain small (trace?) amounts of mercury. I'd have to go look it up again.
Even so, mercury is not the only concern w/vaccines.

There are only a handful of vaccines that still contain thimerosal. All of them are manufactured by Sanofi Pasteur and all, with the excetion of the influenza vaccine has a thimersol free version.

http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm

I recently did a Medscape CE on rotovirus.

http://www.medscape.com/viewprogram/4007

Rotovirus results in very few deaths due to dehydration in the US. The same can not be said for children in less developed nations. In developed nations rotovirus does carry significant financial impacts, as does chicken pox.

RotaShield is the vaccine that was pulled off the market due to 15 cases of intussusception in children following vaccination. RotaShield was rhesus derived orally administered live vaccine.

Rotarix and RotaTeq are the 2 new rotavirus vaccines, both are live, attenuated vaccines administered in 2 or 3 oral doses. One is bovine-human derived, the other human. I searched the FDA site and can't find that either have been approved, as of last April both were in phase 3 trials.

Based on clinical trials Rotarix has been approved for use in a couple of countries.

mandana · Feb 10, 2006

In post #85, my post is quoted by you. That means you were posting to me, or at least that you should have known I would assume you were addressing me directly. Otherwise, why on earth pull my post into it at all??? Again, with the right there in black and white for all to see.... And yes, the issue is fuzzy, but it certainly doesn't become less so when people claim that statements were made that were never made (as in when you claimed that I said the vaccine question is a tenet of CAN), or purport that this organization or the other has taken a stand that they haven't, in fact, taken. And the few parents that I have known who have foregone vaccinating their children completely, did not make the decision based on inflammatory or emotional 'observations'. They have either witnessed their child's deterioration after the first dose of the MMR, or have an older child with autism that they feel was caused by a vaccination. Disagreeing with them is fine, but assuming that these people didn't think long and hard about their choice is an outright fallacy. Many others have chosen to separate out the vaccinations, and have their child receive each shot individually, usually at their own expense, since insurance will only cover the 'package' deal. Are these parents also making their decisions based on the 'inflammatory, emotional observations' or do they pass your litmus test for being capable of making rational, well informed decisions?

OK, here's my last post on the subject, and I'm only going here because I want you to know that I wasn't quoting you when I said the bit about it not seeming to be a tenet that they hold dear. It was a statement meant to clarify that while they might not dismiss 100% the connection, it certainly isn't something that is on their front page with a big flashing arrow. I was NOT quoting you, and this is evident because there are no quotation marks nor did I directly quote that from you like I did above. In no way, shape or form did I intend to give the impression that I was quoting you. I was, however, arguing with you.

We can go back and forth on the other matter until we're both blue, which I have zero intention of doing. I said it the way I see it, you said it the way you see it. And you're right, it's all in black and white. Once again, I'm not an expert. It's only an opinion.

Amanda

jeepgirl, LPN, NP · Feb 12, 2006

This is my last post on this subject. I would much rather prevent my child from getting a disease that would most likely harm him or her or might even kill him or her RATHER than not do it out of fear because of a "risk" that hasn't been adequately proven. All I can say for now is that you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. And you can tell a parent that they are possibly risking their childs life, but you can't make them listen. I guess the same can be said from the point of not wanting to vaccinate. However, from my viewpoint (which can be reversable) - each parent has his or her own choices to make, and if that choice effects their child negatively, then that parent has to live with it.

LydiaNN · Feb 12, 2006

Well, given that posters are dropping like flies, announcing that they're leaving the thread, I may just be talking to myself here. But, what the heck, it sure isn't the first time! While there are indeed 'hardliner' parents who believe their children shouldn't be vaccinated against anything, no matter what, there are many more who just want to find that middle ground. How can you determine the minimum dose a child needs to be protected, and adminster that dose in the safest way possible? Vaccination 'hardliners' who advocate that all children should be given the doses according to the recommended schedule, with no consideration given to those children who 'may' be part of the 'small' subset of kids who 'may' react negatively to vaccines are no more a part of that elusive middle ground than the rabid anti-vaccination crowd.

wincha · Feb 12, 2006

I think you need to make an informed decision. That is those with children who are the autism spectrum do make sure their children either do not get any more vaccinations especially if they saw a regressive change after vaccinating, and or wait until they are older to vaccinate(they do this with their other younger children) and of course make sure the vaccinations are mercury free. Also there are nurses and doctors out there that do not agree that the chicken pox vaccine is necessary and if they can find a way to hold off on this at least give the children a chance to get the disease itself and if not vaccinate at a certian age where if the child got the disease at an older age it would be more serious ie after 10 or 12. There is more here than you have to or I just wont' get my child vaccinated. Most peds do not go into that much detail about the side effects(I'm not talking about the basic fussy, fever side effects either)