Vaccine Court Rejects Autism Claims

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-14-2005
Vaccine Court Rejects Autism Claims
27
Thu, 02-12-2009 - 3:36pm

Vaccine Court: No Merit to Claims That Thimerosal in Vaccines Contributed to Autism
By Miranda Hitti
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD

Feb. 12, 2009 -- The federal "vaccine court" has rejected claims that either the measles/mumps/rubella vaccine or thimerosal in vaccines caused children's autism.

The vaccine court -- shorthand for the Office of Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims -- administers a system that since 1988 has overseen all claims for compensation due to injury from vaccinations.

Today's ruling is a major setback for the more than 5,000 cases in which families claim that the MMR vaccine, either alone or due to the mercury-based thimerosal preservative in the vaccine, caused a child's autism.

Lawyers for the families and Department of Health and Human Services (the defendant in the suit) agreed to argue three test cases. In these cases, the vaccine court agreed to decide whether there was sufficient evidence to blame vaccines for autism -- and whether to pay damages to the families.

The decision, in all three cases, is no. The court formally rejected arguments that either the MMR vaccine or thimerosal caused the children's autism.

Although huge amounts of scientific evidence were heard in the case, the vaccine court's decision is a legal ruling and not scientific proof.

Last March, federal officials said that a Georgia girl, Hannah Poling, was entitled to compensation from a federal vaccine injury fund because she developed autism-like symptoms after receiving childhood vaccines in 2000.

WebMD will be updating this story throughout the day as more information becomes available.

http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/news/20090212/vaccine-court-rejects-autism-claims






Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-03-2006
Thu, 02-12-2009 - 4:35pm
Isn't it odd that this aticle came out a day before the court ruled? http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article5683671.ece

"Although huge amounts of scientific evidence were heard in the case, the vaccine court's decision is a legal ruling and not scientific proof."


Hmmm, the court also ruled that O.J didn't murder his wife, doesn't mean he didn't do it. It boggles my mind how much faith we put into science and other people.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-05-2008
Thu, 02-12-2009 - 4:44pm

<

Totally agree. People don't think for themselves or question at all it seems. So sad. Love for the almighty $$$ trumps reason I guess.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2007
Thu, 02-12-2009 - 5:20pm

"Hmmm, the court also ruled that O.J didn't murder his wife, doesn't mean he didn't do it."

LMAO! So true!

Photobucket Thanks to Andie for my siggy!



Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2008
Fri, 02-13-2009 - 8:15am

IMPO, and to be fair, I think people need to be careful on this ruling. One cannot use the Poling case as proof and turn around and not use this one as proof. I don't think either side can have it both ways. And again, that's just to be fair.

Rands

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-03-2006
Fri, 02-13-2009 - 9:35am

Mercury toxicity is very hard to prove. I believe a lot of children can get autism because they are born with a toxic overload from their mother through dental amalgams and environmental exposures, and that vaccinations cause a cumulative effect on top. I disagree with this article and still believe that autism happens because a baby's body is not capable of filtering out toxins at 2 months of age (when the 1st vaccine is given) and the blood brain barrier has not formed properly.


I think these so called "experts" are missing the point and should allow toxicologists to make some diagnosis instead of inexperienced physicians that are not trained in this field. Plus, how can we reject the FACT that many kids were fine before vaccination, and then turn for the worse after vaccination. Sometimes we fail and believe someone just because they wear a white coat and have a medical degree, and we totally ignore a grieving mother and family. Science can only go so far, but faith, love

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-28-2007
Fri, 02-13-2009 - 9:57am
Yup! Like in 1999 and the INS forced me to get Hep B, MMR, Varicella, dtap, IPV ALL AT ONCE. Then I conceived ds a few months later and low and behold he has autism....duh. And when he had his MMR at 15 months, his symptoms got worse.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Fri, 02-13-2009 - 10:22am

Hey there...laying low and not posting, but I agree with you that both sides need to be careful here.


iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2007
Fri, 02-13-2009 - 10:45am

The Petitioners submitted 1085 pieces of evidence.

]

But of course. They mock the program, citing Daubert... knowing that one can safely (rather, scientifically) hide behind the decision - yet, at the same time, quote mine the rulings (Kathleen Seidel is notorious for this) with "relevant" information in which to discount claims of injury. It's perfect.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2008
Fri, 02-13-2009 - 11:32am

I was wondering where the hell've ya been... Hope you're doing well.


I also think we need to be careful wrt: Wakefield. His rebuttal to Deer appears he is not backing down from his initial research. (Thanks for posting BTW Minority). I admit, I'm a little bias with Wakefield though.


Personally, I don't think the debate will end either. On one hand you have strong beliefs on both sides, and on the other - you have to admit, we also have a lot of corruption (mainly on defendants' side, though. ;-))

Photobucket Photobucket

Rands

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2008
Fri, 02-13-2009 - 11:33am

The whole thing's rather sickening, IMHO...


Rands

Pages