Hacker News Reader

Comment by prakashrj | Hacker News Reader

Check Vaccination schedule. 1st dose of MMR is given between 12 and 15 months.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/child-adolesc...

Unless you regress into severe Autism, it's very difficult for parents or even doctors to recognize Autism until they are atleast 2 years.

Also according to the schedule, there is no big dose around 2 years. After 18 months, there are not many doses on schedule until children are again 4 years.

Most parents complain about MMR vaccination that is scheduled at 15 months. My son regressed into Autism after MMR. It is true. I hope the world realizes it before more children get effected.

View on HN

First things first: sorry about your son's autism.

> My son regressed into Autism after MMR. It is true. I hope the world realizes it before more children get effected.

"The world" does not dispute that your son started showing signs of autism right after getting the MMR vaccine. Since there is no scientific causal explanation, and since study after study after study have shown that children who get the MMR vaccine do not develop autism at higher rates than those who did not get the vaccine, the best explanation is that the timing of the onset of your son's condition is a coincidence. I understand why parents dealing with their own personal sample size of one jump to that conclusion, but the link is just not there.

    > the link is just not there.

Watch the 'Vaxxed' documentary [1] about a CDC whistleblower who tells exactly WHY "the link is just not there".

[1] http://1337x.to/torrent/1789192/Vaxxed-From-Cover-Up-To-Cata...

Respectfully, saying "just watch this 90 minute film" is not a very worthwhile contribution to the discussion.

I gather from summaries I've just now seen that this film claims there is a global conspiracy to suppress the truth. If you're interested in reality, you can start reading about all the many reasons Wakefield has been discredited here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield

The most damning condemnation of Wakefield's "research" isn't even his own retraction of it. It's the number of his "subjects" (N=12, remember) that have come out and said he outright fabricated his data, as regards their child.

When a double-digit percentage fraction of the subjects in your "seminal" work cry foul about that work, you either have to give up that story, or admit that you're just making shit up.

Let's be clear here: Andrew Wakefield falsified his data and was stripped of his medical license for it.

He was invested in a company developing a new vaccine preservative and the study was purely a scare tactic to get vaccine makers to switch from a cheap patent-free preservative (thimerosal) to an expensive patented one.

Vaccines in the western world have completely dumped thimerosal out of an extreme abundance of caution. Many of the vaccines don't even use a preservative or use a trace amount since we have good refrigeration and fast transportation networks. Despite all that the rate of autism diagnosis has continued to increase completely unchanged. In fact rates of autism diagnosis hasn't been affected by anti-vax parents refusing vaccines either. If you properly control for induced bias there is no difference in autism rates among anti-vax parents and rational parents.

When you hypothesize a causal relationship, remove the causal factor, and the outcomes are unaffected we call that hypothesis <i>disproven</i>. There is no link between vaccines and autism. Period. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com