I’m keeping one now on responses to the Lancet retraction of the Wakefield’s paper.

I’ve added your post to the list.

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2010/02/on-the-lancets-retraction-of-wakefields-1998-paper-alleging-a-connection-between-the-mmr-vaccine-and.html

The good news is that the lack of connection between any vaccine and autism is finally getting some traction in the mainstream media.

I have to laugh a little, at a person I know who on one hand, will say she knew that her child was Autistic, nearly from birth…but on the other, say “I think people who don’t vaccinate are protecting their children from Spectrum disorders” It’s almost like a splinter group of moms have been brainwashed into believing that the MMR causes Autism…that’s what I meant as quoting the link between autism and vaccines like a religion.

Imagine how much safer OUR kiddos would be if EVERYONE got the flu vaccine. I know I wouldn’t be so scared every year, until my AG got her shot.

What drives me up the wall with antivaxers is that they often resort to emotional arguments about their children since facts are not on their side.

And I’m sympathetic to what autism parents face. I may not live it myself, but my sister does. Her son, my 8 year-old nephew, has autism and I know what she goes through. But despite the challenges her son faces and her hopes for his future, she doesn’t follow this vaccine/autism myth, either. And she vaccinates her children.

The thing is, as asthma parents we could use OUR kids as an argument, too, couldn’t we? The way threatening herd immunity is a bigger risk to them than it is to kids without a chronic breathing issue. Then again, we don’t have to, what with ACTUAL SCIENCE on our side.

Okay, rant over. (for now)

Danielle–Have you read that whole post, too? It doesn’t even address the actual, unethical concerns that the GMC, the Lancet, and Brian Deer’s articles all point to. I started writing a post directed just to that one alone, but A) it infuriated me even more, the closer I read it, and B) it would’ve taken hours.

But I still might.

Re: calling the retraction “censorship” OF COURSE IT IS CENSORSHIP. I only trust peer-reviewed scientific journals because they are the most rigorously censored publications out there. It’s not about freedom of speech, it’s about science and scrutinizing the experimental process.

Oh, how I could go on and on, but I won’t. For some reason this particular issue has really irked me since I was like 14.

So glad this retraction happened.

The other thing, is the retraction isn’t going to garner half as much press as the original article did.