Comments on: Vaccine Court Decision: thimerosal containing vaccines do not cause autism

By: RSS agregator » Blog Archive » Tumultuous Week in the Vax World.

RSS agregator » Blog Archive » Tumultuous Week in the Vax World. — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 12:01:38 +0000

[...] Lastly, the next 3 Omibus Autism Proceeding test cases using the thimerosal causation theory were all denied. [...]

By: Clay

Clay — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:29:27 +0000

Well, let’s hope that Teresa Cannoli doesn’t read this, or if she does, figures I saved her the effort of writing. ;-)

By: Sullivan

Sullivan — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:59:00 +0000

Clay,

I see that. I just want to head off any complaints by people who might want to accuse you of something you obviously weren’t doing (impersonation).

By: Anne

Anne — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:55:17 +0000

Daedalus2u, I was thinking the same thing. The anti-vax bloggers had their posts ready to go on publication of the decisions. Regarding the Thorsen possible scandal, juicy as it may turn out to be, Special Master Hastings has already headed off any argument that casting doubt on the Hviid and Madsen epidemiological studies would make a difference.

The petitioners argued that epidemiological studies weren’t suited to picking up the small percentage of autistic kids that, according to them, had a form of regressive autism resulting from their hypothesized inability to excrete mercury. In the King decision, Special Master Hastings said:

“I have looked beyond the epidemiologic evidence to determine whether the overall evidence—i.e., medical opinion, circumstantial evidence, and other evidence considered as a whole—tips the balance even slightly in favor of a causation showing as to Jordan’s autism.

This case, however, is not a close case. The overall weight of the evidence is overwhelmingly contrary to the petitioners’ causation theories. The result of this case would be the same even if I totally ignored the epidemiologic evidence.”

King v. HHS, p. 116, emphasis in original.

By: daedalus2u

daedalus2u — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:10:30 +0000

I suspect that this is the reason for the flurry of anti-vax activity against thimerosal and Dr Poul Thorsen, not Wakefield. My understanding is that the attornies get a heads-up before the verdict is published.

By: Teresa C.

Teresa C. — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:09:39 +0000

I dunno, whatever. I was trying to be funny.

By: Sullivan

Sullivan — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:07:55 +0000

Clay,

I assume that since your avatar is showing, you are intending this as clearly sarcasm and not as an impersonation.

By: Teresa C.

Teresa C. — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:04:05 +0000

This is just more evidence of proof of collusion between the vaccine court and Big PHARMa! All you people do is deny the proof I see every day, every time I have to clean the poop off the wall and floor. I know what I know, and nothing will ever convince me otherwise!

By: Sullivan

Sullivan — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:41:16 +0000

Astrid,

You are correct, this is far from over. But—
first, this decision involves three test cases, not just one.

Second, this decision also took on the general question of whether thimerosal causes autism.

Yes, there can be other arguments if/when they get data to support the idea that vaccine cause autism.

The real question is—if they had data for another method (say, “too many too soon”) why didn’t they present it in court?

By: Astrid

Astrid — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:35:47 +0000

Of course, this court decision involves only one case. Another court could make a different decision in the case of another child, and the antivaccine crowd could still claim vaccines cause some forms of autism.