1
Severing the Link between Vaccines and Autism
Ronny Roadrunner
Professor Eagan
English 110-02
March 20, 2013
2
In 1998 an article published in the journal Lancet, Doctor Andrew Wakefield stated that
vaccines were to blame as the cause for autism in eight children. After its publication, the article
received heavy criticism for its methods in achieving the results. Despite all of the disapproval
by many of Doctor Wakefield’s peers, the theory he created quickly gained support from
numerous individuals: many of which were parents of autistic children. Of the many supporters,
several celebrities have chosen to endorse the theory that vaccines can be a main cause for
autism in children. Celebrities today have an overwhelming influence in fashion trends as well
many other social norms. With that, sadly their influence is also impacting societal health trends.
Unfortunately, due to their lack of medical knowledge, their ability to influence parents on
whether or not to vaccinate their child is adversely impacting the health and wellbeing of society.
Since the original study by Dr. Wakefield, there have been several scientific studies done to
disprove his findings and confirm that vaccinations cannot be to blame for an autism diagnosis.
Despite the original claim by Dr. Wakefield and its support by numerous celebrities, scientific
research has disproved the theory that vaccinations can be attributed as the causative agent to
autism. By providing scientific evidence that undoubtedly refutes the three most common
arguments supporting the theory that autism is caused by vaccines, and disproving the faulty
opinions that are heavily supported by celebrities, this evidence undeniably disconnects the link
that has connected vaccines and autism for so long.
There are several theories that have surrounded the vaccination/autism debate: many of
which lack any credibility. Of these numerous theories, there are three valid arguments that
attempt to link vaccinations to autism. The first plausible argument connecting vaccinations to
autism involves the Measles Mumps Rubella (MMR) vaccine. This argument comes directly
3
from the study published by Dr. Wakefield. In the Lancet article, he stated that eight children
showed signs of autism within 30 days of being vaccinated with the MMR vaccine. He further
proposed that the MMR vaccine caused a form of gastrointestinal inflammation that led to
difficulties in the permeability of certain peptides, ultimately leading to an abnormality in brain
development (Gerber & Offit, 2009). The second of these arguments involves Thimerosal, an
ethyl-mercury based agent that has been added to many varieties of vaccines as an anti-bacterial
agent (Gerber & Offit, 2009). The fear is that Thimerosal, being mercury based, can lead to a
form of mercury toxicity in the child that can further lead to autism (Rimland, 2000). The root of
this argument stems from a decision made by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in 1999. Two years prior the FDA called for a
quantification of mercury in all food and drugs. After this was completed, it was determined that
by the age of six months, a child could be receiving a considerable amount of mercury though
the injection of vaccines (Gerber & Offit, 2009). Although there was no data that suggested any
harm this may pose, the American Academy of Pediatrics demanded that Thimerosal be removed
(Gerber & Offit, 2009). The decision made by the AAP created a false impression among many
individuals, and consequently created a fan base of supporters. The third argument holds only a
small amount of validity; it argues that some vaccines are administered in a manner that can
overwhelm a child’s immune system. This argument stems from a court hearing that found
vaccinations the main cause for autism in a fifteen month old female child. The child in this case
was unlike many children in that she suffered from a preexisting condition that was intensified
after being vaccinated (Meadows 2007). While these arguments hold enough validity to require
refutation, there is another factor linking vaccinations to autism that should also be addressed:
celebrity influence. In the U.S as well as many other countries, celebrities have the ability to
4
influence many people. When it comes to the vaccination and autism debate, many celebrities,
like Jenny McCarthy, have sided with non-scientific opinion and have used their celebrity
influence to inaccurately inform many parents that vaccinations cause autism.
In 2002, a Finland study reviewed the records of over half a million children, of which all
were vaccinated with the MMR vaccine. Of the 535,544 vaccinated children, a total of 335 were
diagnosed with autism; however, none of which suffered from gastrointestinal inflammation
(Makela, A., Nuorti, J.P., & Peltola, H., 2009). The results of this study not only illustrate that
there was not a significant amount of diagnoses to positively link the MMR vaccine to causing
autism, they also reveal inaccuracies from the initial study. The fact alone that not one of the 335
children who were diagnosed with autism failed to suffer from inflammatory bowel disease
indicates that the original study done was flawed and unreliable. In a separate similar study, done
in Denmark, scientists compared the results of a group of children between the years 1991 to
1998. Of those 537,303 children, 440,655 of them were vaccinated with the MMR vaccine; the
others were not (Madsen, Hviid, & Vestergaard, 2002). Of the two groups there was not a
significant difference in the amount of diagnoses between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated
group (Madsen, Hviid, & Vestergaard, 2002). The results of these two studies both indicate that
results originally identified by Dr. Wakefield were entirely inaccurate. Not only is the MMR
vaccine not capable of causing autism, the fact that gastrointestinal inflammation was not a result
in so many children show that Dr. Wakefield’s theory of the MMR vaccine completely lacks
credibility. Opinions that have formulated as a result of the original findings should be able to be
changed as the evidence to support the claim is no longer valid.
The argument involving Thimerosal, and it contributing to autism stems from a
misleading decision made by the AAP and the FDA in 1999. The AAP called for the removal of
5
Thimerosal in vaccines given to children, due to the fear that children may be receiving a
questionable level of mercury prior to being six months of age (John, 2000). Following that
decision, the public formulated an opinion that Thimerosal must be a causative agent to autism.
Contrary to the opinion about Thimerosal, research studies have tested the theory and proved that
it is not valid. In one of these studies the Center for Disease Control (CDC) examined the records
from 140,887 children who were vaccinated between 1991 and 1999. Of these children there
were not a significant number of them diagnosed with autism. After reviewing these records, the
CDC could find no relationship between Thimerosal containing vaccines and autism (Gerber &
Offit, 2009). Similar studies were also conducted in the United Kingdom as well as England.
Researchers in these countries were also unable to determine that a link between Thimerosal and
autism existed. These studies are only part of the evidence that Thimerosal does not cause
autism. Thimerosal is ethyl-mercury based and not methyl-mercury based. The name is not only
the difference in between the two. The two chemical compounds differ in their chemical
structure as well as the way the body breaks them down (Gerber & Offit 2009). Their main
difference in metabolism can be attributed to their half-life. A half-life can be described as the
amount of time it takes for half of the substance to be metabolized within the body. Studies have
shown that because ethyl-mercury has a significantly lower half-life, its likelihood of remaining
in the body long enough to cause harm is very low and furthermore would be out of the child’s
bloodstream long before it could ever cause any mental harm (Gerber & Offit, 2009). The
results of these observations clearly show that the theory of Thimerosal causing autism cannot be
a credible argument any longer. Since 1999, Thimerosal is no longer found in vaccines that are
administered to children. This fact along with the studies done should halt any new claims
involving Thimerosal being linked to autism.
6
Another argument is that the administration of multiple vaccines simultaneously may
overwhelm or weaken the child’s immune system. This weakened state creates an interaction
with the nervous system that causes autism. This is one of the many arguments that have been
generated after others failed to stand their ground. It is not a false statement that the immune
system of an infant is not quite what it will be once the child is older. However, with that being
said, to say that an infant’s immune system is incapable of formulating a response to a number of
vaccines simultaneously is simply untrue. Experts believe that at worst, an infant’s immune
system is more than capable of responding to hundreds if not thousands of vaccines all at once
(Gerber & Offitt, 2009). One of the reasons this argument received so much support, is that in
2007 People magazine published the results of a court hearing in which the family of a young
girl sued the Department of Health and Human Services because they claimed it was vaccines
that caused their child’s autism. The court found that the child’s vaccinations were the cause
leading to autism. While this decision seems to contradict what science has proven, it was the
situation that differed. The young girl suffered from a preexisting condition that worsened after
receiving her routine vaccinations. This case differs greatly from the average child. Following
these results many other cases have sprung, but without the same circumstances to prove that
autism was a direct result of being vaccinated. This argument of too many vaccines does not hold
solid evidence to be considered a valid claim. Scientific research has invalidated the theory and
shown that the amount of vaccines cannot be to blame as the cause for autism.
While all of the listed arguments have been proven to be false, there remains a factor that
seems to keep the theories alive: the celebrity influence factor. It is a proven fact that celebrities
have a huge influence when they choose to side with something. A look at presidential elections
easily shows that when a candidate has support from Hollywood, their odds of winning the
7
election grow substantially. While all of these issues may seem harmless, it is shocking to know
that celebrities have an influence on parents and their child’s health. Jenny McCarthy is a famous
model and actress. She is also famous for advocating against childhood vaccinations. She and so
many other celebrities have created a fan base that with an alarming amount of support. The
problem with this is that the information they are spreading is lacking in scientific evidence. Just
as previously stated, scientific research has proven that autism cannot be caused by vaccinations;
however, these celebrities continue to promote this false information. They are by no means
experts in the field of autism, nor are they research scientists. Although they are advocating for
what they feel is right, their reasoning lacks credibility and should not be so easily accepted.
Furthermore, as a result to the negative celebrity influence, parents are continuing to choose
against vaccinating their children in fear of them becoming autistic; even though science has
proven that these claims are no longer valid.
The debate surrounding autism and vaccines has lasted more than twelve years to date.
Following many of the studies done to disprove the original theory, many scientists have
changed their position and chosen to side with the facts in that vaccines cannot be to blame for
causing autism. The theories involving the MMR vaccine, Thimerosal, and overwhelming a
child’s immune system have all been refuted without question. A fact that most certainly lays
these arguments to rest is that in 2011, the original article in Lancet was retracted due to
inaccuracies in the study by Dr. Wakefield (Patil, 2011). It seems that the only thing keeping the
opposing argument alive is the uneducated influence by today’s celebrities. While everyone has
the right to free speech, it should be taken into account that not all speech is worth the publicity
that it receives. As for celebrities advocating against childhood vaccines; it would simply be
uneducated and ridiculous to abide by their strongly opinionated suggestions. Vaccines cannot be
8
attributed with causing autism. All valid arguments have been tested and proved unviable.
Consequently to the findings of all of the scientific research, the link that was once believed to
exist between autism and vaccinations should undoubtedly be severed and despite any celebrity
influence and moreover, parents should no longer fear vaccinating their children. Continuing to
allow any of the refuted arguments to persuade parents from vaccinating their children could
only warrant negative affects to today’s society, not to mention the health of the unvaccinated
child.
9
References
Gary L Freed, G., Clark, S., Butchart, A., Singer, D., & Davis, M. (2011). Sources and
Perceived Credibility of Vaccine-safety Information for Parents. Pediatrics. 127(1), 107112.
Gerber, J.S & Offit, P.A. (2009). Vaccines and Autism: A Tale of Shifting Hypothesis.
Vaccines. 48.456-461.
John, T. (2010). “Paranoia Strikes Deep”: MMR Vaccines and Autism. Psychiatric Times.
27(3), 1-8.
Lee, M. & Male, M. (2011). Against Medical Advice: The Anti-consumption of Vaccines.
Journal of Consumer Marketing. 28(7), 484-490
Madsen, K.M., Hviid, A.,& Vestergaard, M.(2002). A population-based study of measles,
mumps, and rubella vaccination and autism. New England Journal of Medcine.
347(19),1477–1481.
Makela, A., Nuorti, J.P.,& Peltola, H. (2002) MMR Vaccination and Autism: Neurologic
disorders after measles-mumps-rubella vaccination. Pediatrics. 110(5), 957–963.
Meadows, B. (2007). Autism Vaccinations on Trial. People. 68(1), 69-70.
Patil, R. (2011). MMR Vaccination and Autism: Learning and implications. Human Vaccines. 2
(2), 281-282.
10
Rimland, B. (2000). The autism epidemic, vaccinations, and mercury... including commentary by
Downing D. Journal of Nutritional & Environmental Medicine.10 (4), 261-9.
Wallis, C. (2008, March 10). Case Study: Autism and Vaccines. Time. Retrieved from
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1721109,00.html.