Autism Ruling a Victory for Practical Medicine
Posted: Sunday, February 15, 2009
by Terry Mitchell
http://commenterry.blogs.com
Last week, a special U.S. court ruled against three families seeking damages from a federal program set up to compensate people injured by government-mandated vaccines. These families argued that their children's autism was brought on by their childhood vaccines for measles, mumps, and rubella. They believe the mercury content used as a preservative in those vaccines was the culprit.
Although we can all sympathize with parents of autistic children, I believe the court made the correct decision by siding with the long-held opinions of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the American Medical Association (AMA). I see it as a victory for practical medicine. A ruling to the contrary would not only have cost taxpayers billions of dollars, but it would probably have resulted in a moratorium on all childhood immunizations, leaving children vulnerable to diseases that were once deadly and might soon become deadly again.
Besides, the parents who insist that certain vaccines gave their kids autism can offer nothing more than speculation and anecdotal evidence. So far, they have not been able come up with any kind of hard proof. But why should they pay attention to the medical community when a scholarly intellectual like Jenny McCarthy disagrees? Ironically, many of these same people would ridicule those who, using the same disregard for established science, refuse to acknowledge the existence of global warming.
Basically, they know childhood vaccines cause autism because … well … they just know they do. I'm sorry, but that's not good enough – especially when possible epidemics, or even pandemics, of serious childhood diseases could be the product of an unwise decision.
This Article has been viewed 291 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (2 total)Hi Terry.Wow. I hadn't heard about this. You're certainly right about the possible repercussions. Still, it seems like a tricky situation. On the one hand, it is possible that the parents are correct. On the other, there is the possibility of pandemics. It's tough to weigh the pain of a few against the misery of many. Which is more important? A few kids and their families or an entire population? Glad I'm not the one who would have to make that decision.DianneI'm still open the possiblity that those parents might be right. They just have yet to come up with any hard evidence of their claims. Until then, I think we have no choice but to assume that the courts and the medical community are correct. You are right, though, this is a situation that is tough on all.
The more people try to think they are right, and have the law in their hands the more they are susceptible to corruption. In this case, corruption has taken over and I side with the parents of these damaged children.If it is well known that mercury is used for whatever reason in these vaccines why are they used and why would any parent subject a baby with an immature immune system to mercury?There is enough scientific evidence that mercury in a human body causes damage to the brain, and I believe the judge was biased against a ruling that protects the lives of children rather than exposing them to harm.You may recall that a very large drug company was found to be making up their own reports with ghostwriters who then sent the altered reports and findings to doctors, professors and medical journal that were found to be bogus. I have very little respect for medical journals these days including the "medical" evidence found in this case.No, it has not resolved this issue and it will not be resolved until the drug companies remove harmful chemicals in vaccines and use alternative, safe and natural methods to prevent diseases. Usually it revolves around working with the immune system not trying to destroy it.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.