Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: CDC Statistics Show What Happens When You Don't Vaccinate [View all]jeff47
(26,549 posts)26. Nope. There is zero evidence of vaccinations increasing autism rates.
At least, no evidence that uses basic scientific techniques.
Something else appears to be causing the autism rates to increase.
Nope. The rate of autism diagnosis is increasing. That isn't the same as the rate of autism increasing.
Until the 1990s, autism was pretty much only diagnosed in profound cases. More mild cases were treated as if the kid was "a little off" instead of a medical condition.
Then the 1990s and especially the 2000s happened, where those more mild-to-moderate cases were diagnosed. And conditions that used to be separate, such as Asperger's, went from "he's just a geek" to a condition to a sub-set of Autism.
In other words, you can't say the rate of autism has been going up because the criteria for autism has drastically changed over the last 30 years. Looking at just the total numbers is going to make it appear to be skyrocketing, but the changes in criteria are going to have a large effect on the total cases.
A decent proxy for changes in the autism rate would be the number of profound cases diagnosed, since the criteria for that hasn't changed. I remember hearing that the rate for profound cases was nearly constant, but I can't back that up at the moment. Unfortunately, there's enough chaff that I can't find a link to a decent study with some brief Googling.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
43 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
This article fails to mention that people who are vaccinated can still get the disease, and can also
DesertDiamond
Sep 2014
#1
The following graphic makes clear how current official recommended schedules are varied by country.
proverbialwisdom
Sep 2014
#16
People in the USA are waking up to the idea that vaccinating babies under the age of one
truedelphi
Sep 2014
#29
The following graphic makes clear how the US schedule has changed since the 1980's.
proverbialwisdom
Sep 2014
#17
Watch them all, please. It's clear there's a public health issue here, but not the one you describe.
proverbialwisdom
Sep 2014
#19
Google herd immunity and you'll discover why that's a bad reason to stop vaccinating. (nt)
jeff47
Sep 2014
#25
The vaccines available at that time were: diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (DTP) and smallpox
REP
Sep 2014
#36
Just maybe the diseases developed immunity or resistence to our current vaccinations or
kelliekat44
Sep 2014
#4
True, but by not vaccinating, if you become infected, you become a vector.
littlemissmartypants
Sep 2014
#9
We were very glad to take our polio shots in the fifties as we had kids crippled by it.
freshwest
Sep 2014
#20
Here's some important reading to start with. Sorry about any cognitive dissonance it may cause.
proverbialwisdom
Sep 2014
#32
The “Hear This Well: Breaking the Silence..." YouTube Channel testimonials prove otherwise.
proverbialwisdom
Sep 2014
#39
An informative read for you with a very cogent & well-supported argument, plus #hearthiswell video.
proverbialwisdom
Sep 2014
#41
That's a fearmongering talking point and nothing else. Please review the table in post #16 (above).
proverbialwisdom
Sep 2014
#43