JUNK SCIENCE OR JUNKY REPORTING?
According to The Scotsman, kids who get a thimerasol-preserved injection are six times more likely to develop autism than those who get one without the preservative. I find this hard to believe. AFAIK, there have have no studies that showed a statistically significant risk from thimerasol. If there really were such a huge effect, we’d have seen it before today. Something’s not right here.
6 Responses to “JUNK SCIENCE OR JUNKY REPORTING?”
 Comment by Andrea March 15th, 2004 at 12:29 am |
I have seen it before today. Many times. In fact, I’m debating with myself whether or not to even get the rest of my son’s shots. |
 Comment by judy aron March 15th, 2004 at 12:58 am |
CTVIA (CT Vaccine Information Alliance) – has a very informative website …The woman who runs this organization in CT is very well versed in the subject and works with many medical people |
 Comment by Cathy Henderson March 15th, 2004 at 4:32 am |
Quote: If you want to investigate a really dirty special-interest story, trying checking out how difficult it is for a parent to hold anyone accountable for vaccine-related injuries. Cathy |
|
Comment by Daryl March 15th, 2004 at 6:52 am |
Sorry- but I still don’t buy it. A quick Google search yielded lots of sites alleging same (including a few from lawyers looking to recruit clients). I found nothing from the CDC acknowledging a problem. Nor did I find a cite (not sic) to a peer-reviewed journal. Yeah- autism is awful and the parents obviously want to know what happened. But, at least right now, there doesn’t seem to be any evidence (other than anecdotal) that mercury (or more specifically thimerosal) is to blame. |
 Comment by Laura March 15th, 2004 at 6:56 pm |
Educationnews needs to check its sources. Here’s the CDC’s position on the thimerisol/autism link. Basically, they say there isn’t one. |
 Comment by Reba March 18th, 2004 at 10:41 pm |
DUDE… you ever watch MTV? I rest my case. 😉 |