Anti-Vaxxer Ginger Taylor Fancies Herself a Film Critic Now

American anti-vaxx loon Ginger Taylor has written a review (for a very limited value of review) of Invisible Threat, a short documentary made by Carlsbad High School students and due to be released 1 August 2014.  Ms. Taylor attended a limited screening event in her hometown and is very very mad.  I can at least credit her with actually watching the film before trashing it, unlike her anti-vaxx "colleagues" who simply attacked it and the student filmmakers because it was about autism, vaccines and had Dr. Paul Offit in it.

Ms. Taylor's "review" can be found in it's incomprehensive rambling entirety on her blog.  I have no intent to go point by point but the parts of her incoherent, spittle-flecked diatribe that I could decipher bear the need for correction.

It was a flier for the new "hit" vaccine propaganda piece, "Invisible Threat."  (Since when to people who are in a film, review the film? Oh wait... HHS owns patents on the vaccines it licenses and recommends... forgot who I was dealing with.)

I'll actually give some credit to Ms. Taylor about that particular review however there are many more which can be found by professionals who had nothing to do with the production of the film.  The HHS (Health and Human Services I presume) does not own patents and licenses for recommended vaccines.  Those are held by the manufacturers.  For example, MMR II is owned and licensed by Merck while the Prevnar 13 license is held by Wyeth.  This is a pretty rookie mistake by an alleged "well-researched" anti-vaxx "activist".

You see I have a beloved friend and advocacy partner named Becky Estepp. You all know Becky, she has been a regular on Fox News Channel, and lots of local San Diego area news pieces for years.  If you want to talk a parent in Southern California who can discuss the problems with the vaccine program, and its relationship to the autism epidemic, Becky is your go to gal.

Four years ago, she got a phone call from a high school boy from CHSTV, an awkward sophomore, who said they were making a documentary, and had some questions.  Becky had a long conversation with him, but could tell some of the things she was trying to teach him were a bit over his head.  Then she never heard from anyone on the film again.

Cut to this year when she sees the trailer for "Invisible Threat," and realized THIS was the project she was interviewed for. A totally biased piece, allegedly done by teenagers, that was a bit difficult to believe was done by teenagers.  Why did they not interview her for the actual film?  Great question... I wondered too!

This never happened so either Becky Estepp and/or Ginger Taylor are flat out lying.  Firstly, the Invisible Threat documentary wasn't even proposed until 2012 yet Ms. Taylor claims that Ms. Estepp spoke to a student in 2010, two years prior to it's proposal to CHSTV Films.  How does that work without a Tardis?  Secondly, no students are allowed to make contact with adults like that; they are minors after all.  The parent volunteers will always initially contact potential interviewees.  No one from CHSTV Films ever spoke with Becky Estepp.

We also wondered, "Kids made this?  Really?"  From my estimation, yes they did.  But it seems pretty obvious that they were lead around by the nose on what what and how to "investigate."  In fact we were told at the outset that one of the kids parents worked for Scholastic and "helped" the kids.  I am sure that Rotary "helped" too.  Also apparently the Gates Foundation, "helped"... so....

How is it obvious that the students were "lead around by the nose"?  Was Ms. Taylor there?  Has she bothered to interview anyone involved with the production of Invisible Threat?  Of course not, then she couldn't just rectally-source her claims.  The fact is, is that the students worked completely independently of the Rotary Club; they made it very clear what they wanted to do and they will do it on their own.

But the young people and their advisors thought the Rotary proposal — to make a 20-minute educational film explaining how the immune system and immunization work — seemed boring, they said. And they bristled when the Rotarians told them how the movie should be made, added Bradley Streicher, one of the students who worked on it.

"We said, if we do this, we have to do this on our terms," he said. "We wanted to explore this from both sides."

I have spoken extensively with one of the parent volunteers who informed me that the students decide on the issue, research it, write it, conduct the interviews, conduct filming and editing.  Parent volunteers such as Douglas Green and Lisa Posard assist with contacting subjects, filming and ask some follow-up questions only after the students have interviewed subjects.  I guess given Ginger Taylor's limited ability to grasp science, she needs to project that onto others.  What is the anti-vaxx mantra?  "Do your own research."  These students did and they just didn't find anti-vaxx claims evidence-based or compelling.

She explained that this was the first time the film had been shown in New England (Really? They picked Portland, Maine?) and later explained that one of the reasons that it has not been widely distributed is because the children received death threats after the movie, just like poor Paul Offit (who we have asked for some documentation on these threats, a police report, anything, because, you know... if that shit is really happening, then NOT OK, and we would shame such people into oblivion for it... cause we are kinda sick of being called "baby killers" and being threatened with Child Protective Services as well.)

If Ms. Taylor was told the students received death threats then she was misinformed.  No one involved with CHSTV Films ever claimed they received death threats.  They have however received numerous threats of harm, harassment and intimidation meant to scare them away from completing the project and it nearly worked except the students you claim were "lead around by the nose" convinced the school to let them stay the course.  The school has records and aren't obliged to share them with other anti-vaxx loons.  Ms. Taylor seems to be justifying death threats to Dr. Offit (and he has received actual death threats) just because she doesn't like him.  Are anti-vaxx loons so morally challenged that they can't just condemn the practice of threats and intimidation no matter who they are directed against?  Seems not.

So the film begins, and it is all the same tropes.  It's all Wakefield's fault.  Your body is crawling with a bazillion creatures out to kill you.  Mothers of children who have died of "vaccine preventable" illnesses are beautiful and worthy of your compassion.  Mothers of children who believe vaccines cause their child's autism are into hippy dippy crap like rubbing oils on their kids and moving their limbs around to heal them.

If Ms. Taylor's "assessment" of the film and those involved wasn't bad enough, she goes on to mock mothers who lost their children to vaccine preventable diseases.  Not much more I can say other than to let Ms. Taylor's callous remark reflect upon her.  It is odd that she would be critical of the "vaccines cause autism" mom who engages in alternative medicine when she is representative of the very crowd that Ms. Taylor circulates in.  Perhaps she would have been more approving if the students interviewed the ditchpig mothers who force industrial bleach enemas, drinks and baths onto their autistic children then gush when the poor child shits out his intestinal mucosa.  Maybe parents forcing useless and dangerous chelation on their autistic children based upon bogus tests would meet with Ms. Taylor's approval.  Better yet, how about the one two punch of the Geiers and Mayer Eisenstein that involves falsely diagnosing precocious puberty, chemical castration with Lupron and then chelating?  Or any of the other abusive "biomed" you subject your children to?  Be careful what you wish for Ms. Taylor, had the students dug a little deeper, how much better does your hippy dippy autism mom look now?

The docs that treat their kids are unattractive quacks.  The docs that say vaccines are totally safe are attractive and established and should have angelic music behind them when they speak.

Actually the pro-science, evidence-based physicians who appeared in Invisible Threat had very ominous music playing in the background and they also never said that vaccines were "totally safe".  But more importantly, I would again caution Ms. Taylor to be careful what she wishes for.  Would the previously mentioned quacks like the Geiers, Keri Rivera or Jeff Bradstreet presented better than Dr. Centers?  What difference should it make what they look like, isn't the information they provide be of utmost import?  Perhaps Ms. Taylor had an epiphany (albeit brief) that anti-vaxxers look bad because their message and information are bad.  Ms. Taylor would no doubt be more approving of "more attractive" quacks like Dr. Bob Sears and Dr. Jay Gordon.  They were contacted by CSHTV Films to participate and too bad they both declined to grant them interviews.

Ms. Taylor seems to take a tremendous amount of pride in "unleashing" on the panellists present to answer questions after the Invisible Threat screening.

So this is toward the end of the panel discussion, and I just unloaded on them. And not gracefully either.  The angry, talking 60 miles an hour Ginge burst out of me.  I explained that I was the mother of a vaccine injured child and... blah blah insert my creds here... and watching the movie (that they had all extolled) was hard for me because it contained so much that was false and incomplete and sucky.  (I didn't really say sucky.)

So Dr. Blaisdell addressed me very nicely/handled me, and asked me questions, so I was like.. "Fuck it... I am just going to keep talking as long as they will let me," which was a while. But then she brought it around with a "well what would you recommend for us" giving me a final say... again, good, but totally handling me. 

Of course you were being handled with kidd gloves; that's what sensible people do when confronted with an unhinged, gibbering person in close proximity.  It's quite a lack of self-awareness on Ms. Taylor's part to think that she dazzled them with her facts rather than scared the wits out of them.  Again, this is all I care to try and decipher but for those with more fortitude than I may find the rest of her rant to be an exercise in some kind of psychopathology if that's their interest.

Wakefraud One More Time and Anti-Vaxx Myth-Busting Dr. Iannelli

Since Andrew Jeremy Wakefield aka Wakefraud made another warped bid for attention in the form of threatening a maybe-perhaps-in-the-future-if-he-gets-around-to-it lawsuit against Emily Willingham and Forbes Magazine, it's just as good a time as any to give him the attention he so desperately craves.  C0c0rdance released an educational video which contains Wakefraud's raw real-time PCR data and how it was intentionally altered to achieve measles-positive results entitled "Wakefield's Smoking Gun".  C0nc0rdance's evidence and plain-language explanation leaves no doubt of Wakefraud's intentional fixing of the data to provide his own foregone conclusion.

Next, Vincent Iannelli, M.D. posted an excellent "Vaxopedia" entry "Anti-Vaccine Myths and Misinformation" which will be a handy reference for a quick refutation for the annoying anti-vaxxer you may be arguing with as they will undoubtedly invoke several of the canards debunked by Dr. Iannelli.

"I did my research."

Parents often say that when they are ready to delay or skip vaccines.

Because the idea that vaccines are dangerous is easy to disprove, the anti-vaccine movement surrounds that idea with many myths and much misinformation to confuse parents who are trying to "do their research" on vaccines and how best to keep their children safe and healthy.

This guide to the most common anti-vaccine myths and misinformation will help you understand that vaccines are safe, are necessary, and that getting your kids vaccinated and fully protected against each and every vaccine-preventable disease is the right decision to make.

Please read on for an entertaining rebuttal of 40 anti-vaccine tropes.

Anniversary

the third anniversary of Angelina's diagnosis. Just before, she had been a completely healthy six year old:


then SSPE, the late and invariably fatal measles complication became overt. This video by the German Association of Pediatricians explains the stages - watch it, you'll get the gist - at first, she is "only" clumsy and falls, then the seizures start, and very few months later Angelina was incapable to doing anything. This is the condition she has been in for the past 2.5 years:




Angelina's mother wonders at the end of this video, why parents do not vaccinate their children, while they are all buckling them up in the car. She does support mandatory vaccination (no shots, no school does not exist in Germany).

I agree with the doctor in this video:

Parents - go get your children vaccinated, especially against measles, mumps and rubella. If you are not immune, talk to your doctor and get yourself up to date.
If you are afraid to vaccinate, talk to your doctor and work with him/her on "unscaring" yourself. Then vaccinate your child/yourself. Thank you.

You are an anti-vaccine activist? Have a careful look at that film clip. It shows the results of not vaccinating. Measles could have long been eradicated, where it not for pro-disease activists like you. Please realise that the risk of infecting a baby with measles is something you cannot control.

Trau schau wem (a Dr Bob post)

dedicated to Chris Hickie, MD, PhD

It's been a while since we talked about Dr. Bob Sears, the author of The Vaccine Book, in which he advertises his "alternative vaccination schedule" (which almost doubles the number of office visits at $$$). Dr. Bob, as he likes to call himself, has been widely criticised for his anti-vaccine-critical stance, by us and many others. Don't know how people get the idea he could be anti-vaccine, actually - cannot be his staunchly pro-vaccine friends, like Andy Wakefield

It cannot be his absolutely unwavering pro-vaccine activism on Mothering.com:

 

For any parent who decides not to vaccinate, I don't try to talk them into vaccinating. Going unvaccinated is not a dangerous choice. It's a reasonably small risk.

It cannot be his well measured and positive foreword to an unreservedly pro-vaccine book:

.../... blablabla .../...

With so much care not to be mistaken for someone who is actually against vaccination, I must wonder how Dr. Bob Sears ended up one of the administrators of the:

Parents and Others against Vaccinations 

(my emphasis) facebook group. Ever so slightly embarrassing to get caught on that one amongst anti-vaccine's finest:

If I had not done so already, I would seriously seek my vaccine information somewhere else.

*Trau schau wem = watch whom you trust

Bad Times for Australian Anti-Vaxxers

Meryl Dorey of the Australian anti-vaxx group (although they hate being called that) Australian Vaccination Network or AVN has lost her bid to silence some of her critics via Apprehended Violence Orders (AVO).  Ms. Dorey sought AVOs against Peter Bowditch, founder of the Millenium Project, Daniel Raffaele, founder of the Stop the AVN Facebook page and Daniel Buzzard, a sceptical blogger and outspoken opponent of Meryl Dorey and the AVN.  Ms. Dorey's AVO petition against Mr. Bowditch was thrown out and apparently she cried about it.

But she suffered a setback last month when her AVO was thrown out against one critic, Peter Bowditch, who she claimed posted harassing and abusive messages online.

Unfortunately, Dan Raffaele agreed to the order for lack of will to fight it:

Mr Raffaele, who denied making any threatening calls, said he eventually agreed to the order because he was "sick of dealing with it", although he made sure her "gag order" was struck out.
"The only thing I was never going to agree to was being silenced on the internet," Mr Raffaele said. "The information (the AVN) spread is dangerous and it's not based on anything other than lies - and it costs lives."

All Ms. Dorey succeeded in doing was ensuring that Mr. Raffaele wasn't doing to begin with, which was personally harassing her.  She couldn't silence him though.

Mr. Buzzard is defending his complaint:

Western Australia-based Dan Buzzard, another AVN opponent, said Ms Dorey probably saw taking out the AVOs as a "quick and easy" way to silence her critics.

He will defend the application today.

It is obvious that Ms. Dorey is abusing the laws of her land to silence her critics, a play out of the book that other anti-vaccinationists have done because they want to spread their fear and lies uncontested.  Barbara Loe Fisher, Meryl Dorey's American counterpart and head of the also misleadingly named National Vaccination Information Network (NVIC) tried to sue one of her critics Dr. Paul Offit. The suit was dismissed before even being heard and she whined miserably about it.  JB Handley also tried to sue Dr. Offit and was unsuccessful (correction for the actual settlement here).

We wish Mr. Buzzard defeat over Ms. Dorey's frivolous complaint and hopes she cries again.

But that is not all. New South Wales (NSW), Australia's legislation is submitting a bill that would prevent unvaccinated children from entering pre-school and childcare centres.

Labor leader John Robertson will introduce amendments to the public health act which would give early childhood centres the right to refuse kids who haven't had their shots.

The move comes amid concern about high rates of unvaccinated children in some parts of
 NSW as well as the emergence of so-called "anti-vaxxers" who refuse vaccination.

Some parts of NSW had lower vaccination rates than Rwanda, Mr Robertson said.

In other words, no jabs-no school.  Congratulations AVN!  And another inadvertent action due to Meryl Dorey and her misnamed AVN is the unanimous denunciation of Meryl Dorey by parliament and her deceptive work along with greater scrutiny of dubious healthcare practitioners.  Keep up the great work Meryl, you're your own worst enemy.

Deadline for the Australian Vaccine Network (AVN)

The inappropriately named "Australian Vaccine Network" or AVN for short was ordered by the NSW Fair Trading Commission to change its name to reflect its staunch anti-vaccine position rather than continue to mislead parents by 21 March 2013.

The future of the Australian Vaccination Network is in doubt, following the government rejection of five suggested new names for the group because they don't reflect its anti-vaccination stance.

The AVN has until March 21 to change its name or it faces deregistration, after NSW Fair Trading Minister Anthony Roberts issued a formal order that its name misleads the public.

The organisation does not present a balanced case for vaccination and has no medical evidence to back its anti-vaccination stance, he says.

The current AVN president, Greg Beattie proffered equally misleading name change suggestions that were rejected.

AVN president Greg Beattie told News Limited it was vital the words Australia and Vaccination remained in the group's name because they defined what the organisation was about.

He said the group had sent a letter to the Fair Trading Department to ask whether they would accept one of five suggested name changes.
These include Australian Vaccination Information Network and Australian Vaccination Choice.

"We can't just change our name under the Association's Incorporation Act, we must go through a process of consulting with our members and we need a 75 per cent majority vote," Mr Beattie said.

Mr. Beattie is able to keep "Australia" and "Vaccination" in their name and in fact can just add an "A" to the acronym to make it reflect what it really is, "Australian Anti-Vaccination Network".  This would be beneficial to them as typing in "AVN" will fetch you a porn site.

The AVN (the anti-vaxx one) has filed an appeal with the Administrative Decisions Tribunal and granted a stay until a hearing which has been set in June.

The AVN is fighting a December ruling by Fair Trading that it must change its name, and the warning was put in place on the condition that the group will not have to change its name until its challenge is heard in June.

However a condition has been set that the AVN must place a prominent warning on their website, blog and Facebook page by 26 March 2013 that directs consumers to the current order and misleading name.

Tribunal president, Judge O'Connor, responded to a bid by the AVN to stay proceedings on Friday by placing a number of conditions on the organisation.
A prominent consumer warning must be published on its websites and Facebook page by March 26.

It will state: "NSW Fair Trading has directed the AVN to change its name because it regards the name to be misleading.

"The AVN is challenging this direction and the challenge is currently before the NSW Administrative Decisions Tribunal."

We'll see what the AVN will do and keep you posted.

Update: Since it is 26 March 2013 in New South Wales, Australia, the AVN website and Facebook pages have been updated with the requisite warning.  Let's hope it serves to caution unsuspecting parents looking for factual vaccine information and irritate the AVN on a daily basis.

Tetanus in an Unvaccinated Boy in NZ

It happens - unvaccinated children do contract tetanus (as we had reported before). It doesn't happen very often, but when it does, it is incredibly cruel. Alijah, a 7 year old Auckland (NZ) boy cut his foot (as children will do) and developed tetanus. The NZ Herald provides a harrowing description of what that means:

Within 36 hours, the 7-year-old Auckland boy was crippled by body spasms, unable to swallow and racked with pain.

"He was screaming in agony," mother Linda Williams said.

.../...

"It was hideous. He was spasming every three minutes. He was biting his tongue and bleeding. His arms were spasming and he was arching his back and his whole face and jaw was completely locked."

Alijah was admitted to a ward but 24 hours later he was moved to intensive care, put into an induced coma and paralysed by drugs to prevent the spasms and relieve the pain.

His breathing had to be monitored because the muscle contractions could close the airway, and later a tracheotomy tube was inserted in Alijah's throat to help him breathe.

Luckily, Alijah survived and could leave the hospital after 26 days, although he now faces a year of rehabilitation to relearn how to eat and walk. The parents are blaming themselves for their son's horrific ordeal and have since vaccinated their other children and asked other parents of unvaccinated children at their son's school to reconsider. Although both hold degrees in the science/health field, they had fallen for the anti-vaccine misinformation. Alijah's dad says:

Parents like us make the decision to not vaccinate on very little factual information about the actual consequences of the diseases - massive pain, disability and death - and a lot of non-factual, emotive information from the internet stating inflated figures on the frequency and severity of adverse reactions and conspiracy theories about 'evil' doctors, governments and drug companies.

.../...

Believing myths about vaccines is not the same as getting the facts. And that is the core problem.

We hear from more and more parents who are regretting their non-vaccine decision (e.g. against pertussis) and maybe it is about time more parents spoke about vaccinating. Currently, the discussion seems to be dominated by a very vocal minority, which, despite being on the very fringe manage to endanger children's lives.

ETA: a bit more info and renewed self awareness here.

Messenger's muddled message (updated)

or something along the lines of that. Stephanie Messenger wrote a little book about measles and how great they are - for kids aged 6 to 10. Stephanie's first son died of what she thinks was a vaccine reaction (heartbreaking picture warning), but her sister says was Alexander Disease. Losing a child is very very sad. It doesn't give anyone the right to spew dangerous nonsense and advertise vaccine refusal and taking carrot juice against measles instead. You say "what"? Here's blurb (you can also read Skepticat's summary - it is way cool):

Melanie has measles, so Tina and her mum go over to play and bring healthy food, including carrot juice, because of the vitamin A, which makes measles not so bad. Tina doesn't get measles, because she eats so healthily, which means that Melanie's mum must be a bad mum, because she didn't feed her Melanie enough carrot juice or something. Measles also makes you strong and is great to get, but when junk food guzzling vaccinated Jared gets the measles, it'll hopefully teach him to eat well. Not sure how something that is great to get teaches you a lesson.

Ridunculous! A lot of bloggers have been enraged (it is those details - that the teacher in Melanie's class is pregnant for example), see these insights and well-deserved insolence.

However, what made me (and Katie) really angry is the similarity of the rhythm of "Melanie's marvellous Measles" with "George's marvellous Medicine" a book by Roald Dahl. I cannot possibly know whether this intentional. I do know for sure, though, that while Stephanie thinks measles make kids "mature", and that kids "can feel hot for a day or so" with measles, Roald Dahl knows that they kill. They killed his daughter, Olivia (the smiling girl in the foreground).



Roald Dahl knows that measles are a dangerous illness - he writes:

Olivia, my eldest daughter, caught measles when she was seven years old. As the illness took its usual course I can remember reading to her often in bed and not feeling particularly alarmed about it. Then one morning, when she was well on the road to recovery, I was sitting on her bed showing her how to fashion little animals out of coloured pipe-cleaners, and when it came to her turn to make one herself, I noticed that her fingers and her mind were not working together and she couldn’t do anything. “Are you feeling all right?” I asked her. “I feel all sleepy, ” she said. In an hour, she was unconscious. In twelve hours she was dead. The measles had turned into a terrible thing called measles encephalitis and there was nothing the doctors could do to save her. That was twenty-four years ago in 1962, but even now, if a child with measles happens to develop the same deadly reaction from measles as Olivia did, there would still be nothing the doctors could do to help her. On the other hand, there is today something that parents can do to make sure that this sort of tragedy does not happen to a child of theirs. They can insist that their child is immunised against measles.

 (my bold - again, read the whole thing, this man has a way with words)

So, how does one limit the reach of a dangerous disease door-to-door saleswoman? After some initial resistance, one supplier, Booktopia, took Messenger's marvellous Megalomania off their shelves - here's the press report (worth listening to if just for the lovely accent):



For those who are so inclined, there is a petition asking Pearson Australia Group (Angus and Robertson, and Bookworld) to end sales of ‘Melanie's Marvellous Measles’ in any forum (form?). I am not sure that banning bad books is the way forward, although peddling deadly diseases to kids is pretty far out there. It appears Stephanie Messenger is not going to leave it at that anyway and is planning Messengers Marvellous Movie - making use of another media and providing blog fodder for many posts to come.

Sad really.

ETA (11/1/13) Bookworld have now announced that they will no longer sell Melanie's Marvellous Measles. Messenger says this "doesn't matter". I am afraid she is right...

The Toxin Gambit Part 2: Polysorbate 80 and a Maths Fail

Previously we posted The Toxin Gambit 1: Formaldehyde which was an in-depth examination of what formaldehyde is, actual toxic doses and the amount in vaccines.  We feel these examinations are important for parents who have been frightened into believing that vaccine excipients are harmful when they are, in fact not, particularly in the amounts contained within vaccines.  A blogger who goes by the name of Amanda is one such person attempting to either justify her own fears of polysorbate-80 and/or trying to frighten others.  In either case she is demonstrably wrong with her interpretation of information and is a case study in why you should pay attention in maths classes.

I recently saw a woman on facebook complaining about teh ebil sodium chloride in vaccines, claiming "Sodium chloride: Raises blood pressure and inhibits muscle contraction and growth", channelling Natural News (the Nazi reference was missing from her post though). Did you know that vaccines contain up to 9mg/ml sodium chloride? Yes, that would be .9%, also known as "physiological salt solution" or "normal saline" - the stuff you can get intravenously in half litre amounts (BTDT) and that doesn't even sting when you clean wounds with it. Scientific illiteracy is rife among the anti-vaccine minded and I was just pointed to another example - this time, polysorbate 80 is the evil vaccine ingredient - the Blog "Blinded by the Light" comes up with a malware warning, so be careful when you click the link, I will copy and paste the best bits here, so you don't have to go (here is a pdf as downloaded Saturday morning). Amanda, the blog author, has a "holistic and spiritual paradigm" - maths and sciences are lacking from her approach though, so I am not sure she can claim the "holistic". She has several concerns about the use of Polysorbate 80 in vaccines:

According to the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for PolySorbate 80 there is no information available regarding carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic, or developmental toxicity effects. [1]

There is information on toxicity though - the LD50 (dose at which half of the experimental animals die) is 34500 µl (microliter) per kilogram body weight - this is the equivalent of 24 teaspoons (or 36.6 grams, see below) full of pure Polysorbate 80 for a 3.5 kilogram newborn baby. A huge amount. Vaccines contain a maximum of 100µg per dose (that is threehundredandsixtyfivethousandsevenhundred [365'700] times less than the LD50 for a newborn, we ingest 1000x that (100mg) per day, since Polysorbate 80 is used as an emulsifier in many foods (for example ice cream, yumm). 

Amanda continues (her bolds and italics and underlines):

Reproductive Issues

I’m as apprehensive as the next guy when it comes to animal studies and results given. If you give a rat (or any animal for that matter) large doses of any chemical I’m sure cancer and health issues will ensue. However, this study is interesting.

A research group in 1993 studied the effects on the reproductive organs of rats with very small doses of polysorbate 80 which resulted in infertility. Specifically, they found that Polysorbate 80 accelerated the maturation of the female rats, damaged the vagina and womb lining, caused significant hormonal changes, severe ovary deformities and ultimately rendered the young female rats infertile. [3] 

To give you an idea by what I mean by very small. The dose given to the rats was 0.1 mcg. Compare this to the three-stage injection of the HPV vaccine Gardasil that would contain 50 mcg each injection. [3] [4]

If we assume the baby rats weighed 6 ounces (which  baby rats do normally weigh between 5-6 ounces), to be equivalent, the prepubescent teenage girl would have to weigh approximately 300 lbs.

Wow! That is horrible! Horribly wrong that is. Let me take you through this. We'll start with some basic measurements.

1 ml (milliliter = 1/1000th of a liter) of water weighs 1 g (gram)

1 ml = 1000 µl/mcl (microliter = 1/1'000'000th of a liter)

1 ml of Polysorbate 80 weighs 1.06-1.09 g, so it is a bit denser/heavier than water - I will calculate with 1.06 from here on.

An ounce is 28.35 g - 6 ounces are 170 g, about the weight of a full baby bottle.

300 lbs are about 137 kilograms (that is one big preteen).

Now let's see what the paper actually states:

So, neonatal female rats were injected with 0.1 ml of 1% or 5% or 10% Tween 80 (that is the same thing as Polysorbate 80, just a trade name) on 4 consecutive days. They were injected IP into the peritoneal cavity, which is in direct contact with the uterus. Now Amanda claims the amount given to the rat pups was 0.1mcg (=microgram) and calculates from there. That is wrong.

Remember, 1 ml weighs 1g (1 ml of Polysorbate 80 weighs 1.06 g, so I am going to go with that in the per rat calculations). Pups were applied 0.1ml = 0.1 gram. 0.1 gram is 100 milligram or 100'000 microgram. 1% of that is 1000 microgram (but since it was 1% of Polysorbate 80, 1060 microgram in 100 microliter). Pups were injected 4x with 1%, 5% or 10%, so they received:

1%: 4x1060 microgramm = 4240 microgramm (roughly forty two thousand times more than Amanda claims) 

5%: 4x5300 microgram = 21200 microgram

10%: 4x10600 microgramm = 42400 microgramm (or 42 mg)

What does a newborn rat weigh? Amanda sounds very authoritative when she states "5 to 6 ounces", but that is about as wrong as the rest – newborn rats pups up to the age of about 5 days are called "pinkies". This is why: they are the size and shape of a pinky and weigh about 8 g (less than a third of an ounce). When they are 7 days old, they are "fuzzies" – and weigh about 15 g (half an ounce). 

6 ounce baby bottle    -   3 day old rat pups    -     7 day old rat pups:

Notice how delicate their skin is and remember that the injection these pups have received did not go into the muscle (IM) or under the skin (ID) as vaccine, but IP, into the tummy essentially right next to the uterus.

We go on with an average weight of 12 gram per pup. Your 1% group will have gotten 353'333 microgram (or 353 mg) per kilogram bodyweight (1000/12 x 4240 µg). In order to apply the equivalent amount to a 50 kilo preteen (to stay with the Gardasil example), you would have to apply 17'667'000 microgram, or nearly 18 grams of pure Polysorbate 80 (that is 3.5 heaped tea spoons full - good luck getting that into three 0.5ml syringes).

Your three shots of Gardasil contain 150 microgram of polysorbate 80. In order to expose your preteen to the same amount of Polysorbate 80 that those pups (in the 1% group) got, she should weigh about 0.42 g or about the 12th of a teaspoon full (or 326'000 times less than Amanda claimed).

The wild speculation continues under the heading "Immunocontraceptive". Amanda cites a patent application for a vaccine intended to sterilise animals by vaccinating them with zona pellucida glycoprotein. The inventors explicitly propose to use Polysorbate 80 as an emulsifier, not an active ingredient and at the concentrations in the patent (0.2% in 0.5ml injected intramuscular) it is not going to do anything with the fertility of the recipient without the active ingredient.

Amanda's next worry is disruption of the blood brain barrier - according to her reference 10, not found in the citation list, already observed "at intrevenous systemic doses as low as 3 mg". That may or may not be true (since she doesn't reference the paper she refers to, it could be that those 3 mg were applied to 20 g mice), however, 3 mg are 3000 µg, vaccines contain between 25 and 100 µg of Polysorbate and are not given systemically (despite the "directly into the blood stream" canard that the anti-vaccine minded like to use).

Edited on 24 Sept 2012 to add: Amanda has very kindly come up with reference 10, which in turn cites this 1985 paper for the actual experiment. 25-35g mice (young adult females) were intravenously injected with 3 milligram per kilogram of polysorbate 80 together with methotrexate. If you upscale this to your 50 kilo preteen (3mg/kg), she'll need 150 mg (150'000 microgram) IV to be able to expect an effect on the blood brain barrier. However, vaccines contain 1500 to 6000 times less polysorbate 80 than that and are given into the muscle and not into the blood stream. -end edit-

It is sad that Amanda went out, equipped with very little understanding of maths, immunology, chemistry, or animal experiments, seemingly with the intention to be scared (and to scare)? 

West Virginia Battling Anti-Vaxxers Again

A recent lawsuit was initiated by six West Virginia families against the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).  The lawsuit contends:

A half-dozen families are suing the state Department of Health and Human Resources because they say the department is illegally requiring school children to receive certain vaccines.

If successful, the lawsuit could block vaccination requirements for middle and high school students that are in effect this fall for the first time.

The lawsuit was filed late last week with the state Supreme Court. The suit accuses DHHR of improperly adding vaccines to a list of state-mandated vaccines for public school students.

And:

Lane said the lawsuit is not about immunizations in general, but instead about DHHR overstepping its authority. He said DHHR is requiring the vaccine in a rule but that DHHR can't require vaccines without legislative approval.

"I guess, on their own initiative, the agency has attempted to bypass the Legislature and, in our view, illegally add these other compulsory immunization requirements," Lane said. "And the rest of that is if parents do not comply with these additional requirements - the five additional - then their child cannot go to school in West Virginia."

It's about the vaccines; at least be honest about that.  Previously, the West Virginia DHHS required the recommended series of IPV (inactivated polio virus vaccine), DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus and acellular pertussis), MMR (measles, mumps and rubella), Hepatitis B and Varicella.  West Virginia does not allow for religious nor philosophical vaccine exemptions. The DHHS has added:

A recent rule change requires incoming seventh graders in the state to show proof they received one dose of meningitis, tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis vaccines starting in the 2012-2013 school year. Incoming high school seniors must prove they received booster doses after the age of 16. Without vaccination proof from before or shortly after the beginning of the school year, students cannot attend school, Associated Press reports.

That is a booster of Tdap or TD if the child is pertussis exempt for medical reasons and a meningitis (MPSV4 or MCV4) vaccine series of two.  I don't see how Mr. Lane claims it is five additional requirements.

Mr. Lane also refers to a State Code that requires the DHHS to obtain legislative approval for changes in school vaccine requirements.  I cannot find any State Code which specifies this but I am also not a lawyer.  I did find this document which seems to contradict Mr. Lane's claim that the DHHS must acquire State Legislative approval first:

§64-95-7.
Enterers.
Commissioner’s Authority to Change Immunization Requirements for New School

The Commissioner may, by Order filed with the Secretary of State, modify, add or delete vaccines to be required for new school enterers. The Commissioner’s Orders shall be made after consultation with the State Health Officer and shall be consistent with the immunization schedules referenced in section 3 of this rule. The Commissioner’s Orders shall not exceed those recommendations.

In any event, it will be interesting to see what the ruling(s) on this suit will be.

The Best Anti-Vaccine Comment Ever!

We recently got an anonymous commentor on the Sue Reid propagates MMR Manufactuversy in the Daily Mail post.  She, by far, represents everything that is so wrong  with anti-vaxx dogma and offers a chilling glimpse into the tortured, erratic, absurd and obtuse mind that latches onto vaccine disinformation.
Anonymous first stated:

my son survived because a life saving surgery to fix his colon has been introduced. 50 years ago, he would not have survived!

I then asked:

Now let me ask you this about your child's medical procedure. Did you demand studies from the surgeons that the procedure had been submitted to controlled trials for several years before being performed on your child? Why not?

And then came this from Anonymous (in its glorious, grammar-addled entirety):

Your stupid question Science mom...
Did you demand studies from the surgeons that the procedure had been submitted to controlled trials for several years before being performed on your child? Why not?

Where have I ever led you to believe that I rely on scientific research to make my decisions. My son needed a life saving surgery, and because of advancements in science, he is here today, taking a direct hand in decreasing infant mortality. stop giving credit to your vaccines!
For you gals WHO need so called research to think for yourselves...Where is the solid evidence that babies, who get more than two-dozen doses of vaccines by age six months, are healthier as they grow up than those, who get fewer vaccines or no vaccines? No large, prospective studies have been done comparing the long-term health outcomes of children, who are vaccinated according to the CDC schedule, with those, who are not. I will again take my awesome intuition leading me to think for myself over your "research" conducted by the giant pharmaceuticals, coupled with law makers that are recipients of the deep pockets of these companies. they are the ones who use fear mongering tactics to sell more and more vaccines. Stop accusing Sue Reid and let her write about our debated topic here.. don't you see the conflict of interest with all your "research"?

well here in America, we are progressively challenging the bloated and expensive vaccine schedule and are telling doctors and legislators: "Show Us the Science, and Give Us the Choice." yes i took this from an anti vaccine website -- so what, get over it.
Your children may be healthy now, but you will never know how healthy they could be without all the toxins you are giving them. you Gals, have yet to answer my looming question - what is your explanation (don't care if it is scientific or not) of the growing number of neurological and other disorders? please..I would really love to know?? If your child or (someone you know), suddenly develops lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, or any other auto immune disorders later in life.. you may consider you lended a hand by inundating them with toxins.

so we are clear about the toxins: (to name a few) There is aluminum in Hep B... There are also trace or residual amounts of 2-phenoxyethanol, phenol, albumin, sucrose, lactose, MSG, glycine, formaldehyde, and antibiotics (neomycin) in vaccines. These are very small amounts, but do we want to continually inject even small amounts of these toxins directly into our tiny babies’ developing bodies, given their inability to detoxify and how vulnerable they are to low levels of toxins? If trace amounts of formaldehyde, MSG, or antibiotics were in foods that were to be given to our babies, most of us wouldn’t allow it. Yet, these toxins go directly into the baby’s bloodstream. Vaccines also can contain egg and yeast proteins. We delay giving our babies solid foods, mostly to avoid the proteins that can cause allergies. Why would we inject isolated proteins into their bodies at 2 months old?
Please understand, I am not in favor of any shots... so please stop criticizing my debate, saying i am not posting to the right blog or what does this have to do with MMR or whatever. I am speaking out against them all.

The Italian family received justice. the vaccine was the tipping point, full stop! and Italian court agrees.....THEY WON! :o)

These bear repeating more than I can say:

"Where have I ever led you to believe that I rely on scientific research to make my decisions."

"For you gals WHO need so called research to think for yourselves..."

"I will again take my awesome intuition leading me to think for myself over your "research" conducted by the giant pharmaceuticals, coupled with law makers that are recipients of the deep pockets of these companies."

She don't need no steenkin science, she's got her awesome...

INTUITION

But but but then goes on to say:

well here in America, we are progressively challenging the bloated and expensive vaccine schedule and are telling doctors and legislators: "Show Us the Science, and Give Us the Choice." yes i took this from an anti vaccine website -- so what, get over it.

And this is it, my sublime epiphany.  Oh sure many others have identified and analysed the incongruity, hypocrisy and flat-out deception that embody anti-vaxx diatribes.  But for me, this comment is an unmitigated exposition of what we are dealing with and why we will never, ever be able to proffer any study, any explanation or any debate good enough for them to accept what is so antithetical to their awesome...

I N T U I T I O N

I have no good answers to combat this and I am left to continue to speculate on the state of education in the United States that people such as Anonymous can find their way onto the internets and make comments like this in earnest.  Regardless, it is cathartic to achieve this realisation and I will continue to pillory and counter anti-vaccine disinformation as long as I care to.

Commercial vaccination provider told to stop misleading on their website

News is just in that Babyjabs.co.uk, the website of Dr Richard Halvorsen, a vaccine-critical GP, which promotes/sells single measles, (mumps) and rubella shots has been ordered by the Advertising Standards Authority to stop using misleading wording on their website. The Babyjabs website has been claiming

"This means that the vaccine could be causing autism in up to 10% of autistic children in the UK - between 300 and 400 children a year. The vaccine strain measles virus has been found in the guts - and brains - of some autistic children; this research supports many parents' beliefs that the MMR vaccine has caused autism in their children".

The complaint claimed:

1. the claim "Most experts now agree that the large rise [in autism] has been caused partly by increased diagnosis, but also by a real increase in the number of children with autism" was misleading and could be substantiated.
2. the claim "the [MMR] vaccine could be causing autism in up to 10% of autistic children in the UK - between 300 and 400 children a year" was misleading and could be substantiated; and,
3. the claim "The vaccine strain measles virus has been found in the guts - and brains - of some autistic children; this supports many parents' belief that the MMR vaccine has caused autism in their children" was misleading and could be substantiated.

and three points of the complaint were upheld by the ASA after review of Babyjabs' long response. Read the reasoning here - it is interesting.

A quick look at the Babyjabs MMR web page today shows that there are still desperately promoting the MMR-autism link, citing the recent Italian MMR-ruling (Just the Vax passim), and emphasising MMR side effects, without comparing them to the complications of the disease (over 20% of measles patients in Merseyside were hospitalised). This is fear mongering at its best with the purpose of selling a part of the protection (mumps single vaccine has not been available in the UK for several years) that parents could get free on the NHS. Proponents of the single vaccines (often private doctors selling them) like to argue that offering parents the choice to get single vaccines will overall increase compliance and that they are just responding to parental requests. However, fact is that children on a selective schedule experience significant delays until full protection (if they are able to get all singles) and a sales site who meticulously lists all proven and alleged adverse vaccine events and concludes:

We do not offer the MMR vaccine at BabyJabs We are concerned that the safety of the vaccine has not been adequately demonstrated, and believe that the single vaccines are suitable alternatives that are equally – possibly more – effective and are probably safer.

 does not appear a "neutral provider" at all.

See also the excellent write up on Stuff and Nonsense who was the complainant...
 

Washington State Pertussis Outbreak

There is an outbreak of pertussis in Washington state that has produced a prevalence that hasn't been seen in decades.  In fact, 1942 was the last time this many cases was recorded.  So far there have been 3400 reported cases and the age groups most affected are infants less than one year old and children ages 10-13 years old.  This outbreak, as in California two years ago has demonstrated the reduced duration of efficacy and to some extent, the overall efficacy of diphtheria, tetanus and acellular pertussis toxoid vaccines (DTaP).  This has led to anti-vaxxers exploiting these outbreaks as a demonstration that DTaP vaccines are useless.  Whereas nothing could be farther from the truth.

One particularly notorious anti-vaxxer, Joseph Mercola has used the California outbreak to triumphantly announce that the majority of those infected with pertussis were fully vaccinated.  Well duh, the majority of children are fully vaccinated, but more on that later.  He also cherry-picks an editorial that was published in Pediatrics written by eminent pertussis researcher J.D. Cherry earlier this year.  Mercola only lists the contributing factors for the increase in pertussis prevalence and overestimation of vaccine efficacy but leaves out the contributing factors for underestimating vaccine efficacy and his conclusions.  For instance, Dr. Cherry writes:

Of nasopharyngeal specimens from patients with cough illnesses sent to a commercial laboratory for PCR testing, during the 3-year period 2008–2010, it was found that 14% of the positive specimens were IS1001 positive, indicating B parapertussis infection.(14) In 2010, the positivity rate was 16.5%. These cases would appear as vaccine failures when they are not, as protection against B parapertussis is not expected from current pertussis vaccines.

And:

Vaccine use has resulted in genetic changes in PT, PRN, and FIM in circulating B pertussis strains, and it has been suggested that this has led to increased vaccine failure rates.(22) At the present time, however, there is no evidence to support the hypothesis that evolution is allowing circulating B pertussis strains to escape from vaccine-produced antibodies.(23) If it were to occur, I would expect it to occur first in Denmark, where a PT toxoid vaccine has been in use for ∼15 years; this, as yet apparently has not happened.

Given that Joe Mercola is a salesman, not a researcher and doesn't even know the difference between viruses and bacteria, I'm a bit more inclined to rely upon the expertise of a globally-recognised pertussis researcher who concludes:

To overcome the problem, it needs to be recognized that B pertussis is circulating in all age groups and, therefore, for herd immunity there is a need to universally vaccinate all age groups at frequent intervals.(24) New vaccines should be considered for development that include changes to enhance efficacy but retaining a low reactogenicity profile. This could be DTaP vaccines with multiple additional components and perhaps containing less PT. An alternative would be to develop DTP vaccines with detoxified lipopolysaccharide (the cause of reactions to whole-cell vaccines). It has also been suggested to develop “live vaccines.”(25) There are data available (not presented here), however, that indicate that immunity from DTP vaccines is better than that after infection; therefore, I do not think “live vaccines” are a worthwhile approach. Clearly, additional investments and innovations in pertussis vaccine development are needed to remove pertussis from its position as the leading vaccine preventable disease in the United States.

It is obvious from the California pertussis outbreak in 2010 and the current Washington state as well as the rest of the U.S. currently, that more effective and durable vaccines are needed, certainly not returning to the "good ol' days" of the pre-pertussis vaccine era that begot thousands of infant deaths annually.

Another fallacy that Joe Mercola propagates along with his witless followers is that more vaccinated than unvaccinated have been infected with pertussis.  When one simply looks at the raw data, it appears that way but those claiming more vaccinated than unvaccinated are being infected are either being wilfully dishonest, epidemiologically-ignorant or both.  Let's look at the raw statistics from the CDC as of 20 July 2012 and the Washington Department of Health as of 4 August 2012 (in the format presented by Medical News Today):

• There have been a total of 3,400 cases reported statewide through week 31, compared to 287 reported cases in 2011 during the same time period. That is a 1085% increase for the same time period.
• The overall incidence year to date is 50.5 pertussis cases per 100,000 Washington residents with a rate in infants under one year of age of 241.7 per 100,000. Two hundred and fourteen infants under one year of age were reported as having whooping cough and forty-three of them were hospitalized. Of those hospitalized, thirty-five (81%) were very young (three months of age or younger). Adolescents aged 10-13 years old also have a high incidence rate, 238.2 per 100,000, and comprise 24% of the total cases.
• 75.8% of patients aged from 3 months to 10 years were up-to-date with their childhood diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis (DTaP) doses.
• 43.1% of patients aged 11 and 12 years and 77.2% of 13 to 19 year olds were up-to-date with their TDaP booster shots.
• 93.2% of children aged from 19 to 35 months had received three or more doses, while 81.9% had received four or more in 2010.
• No deaths caused by whooping cough have been reported.

Using these data, demographic/epidemiological data from Table 2. WA State pertussis cases by age group, 2012 YTD and Washington State School Vaccine Exemption data age stratified attack rates and rate ratios were estimated.  These are crude estimates as the age stratification for pertussis incidence reports and vaccination status overlapped.  The state of Washington reported a statewide 5% vaccine exemption for kindergarten through twelfth grade and this was used to estimate the un/undervaccinated populations.  Attack rates for vaccinated (ARv) and un/der vaccinated (ARn) are as follows:

Ages 5-9:    (ARv) 500/411023 x 100 = 0.12%

                     (ARn) 159/21633 x 100 = 0.73%

Ages 10-13 (ARv) 356/329076 x 100 = 0.11%

                      (ARn) 469/17320 x 100 = 2.7%

Ages 14-18 (ARv) 477/431968 x 100 = 0.11%

                      (ARn) 141/22735 x 100 = 0.62%

As we can see, more un/undervaccinated children have been infected with pertussis than fully vaccinated across all age bins.  This translates to children ages 5-9 un/der vaccinated children are 6 times more likely to become infected with pertussis than fully vaccinated. Children ages 10-13 un/der vaccinated are 25 times more likely to become infected with pertussis than fully vaccinated. And un/der vaccinated children ages 14-18 are 6 times more likely to become infected with pertussis than fully vaccinated.

Two hundred and fourteen infants under the age of one year were infected and 43 hospitalised.  Twenty four percent of those three months to one year were un/undervaccinated.  Of those hospitalised, 35 or 81% were three months or younger.  This is appalling that these children suffered needlessly; we need to do more to protect this vulnerable population and people need to stop buying into anti-vaccine lies.

Vaccine Trials: Methods and Best Practices

Time and time again, the strange notion that "vaccines have never been tested in combination" and iterations of that is propagated online and in the media. We had previously addressed this myth, when Dr Bob Sears appeared on Fox Friends. We even presented a handy list of papers, proving how comprehensively vaccines are tested before they can be licensed.

Hexavac with Hepatitis A
Hexavalent vaccine with Rotateq
DTaP with Hib
PCV-13 with all infant vaccines
MMR and Varicella
PCV-7 with MMR, Hib and Varicella
Pediarix with Hib and Infanrix-hexa
New Hib with all infant vaccines
MMR with Varicella
MMR-V with Hib-HepB
MMR-V with all infant vaccines
Meningococcal-C with Hep B and Pentacel
Pentacel with PCV-7

But somehow, it doesn't seem to matter how easily digestible factual information is presented. It is always easier to complain [concerned/enraged/engaged tone on] vaccines have never been tested in combination [tone off; start triumphant gaze].

In my experience, knowledge sticks best when you have honestly worked for it. Here is the chance for anyone who really wants to know how vaccines are tested before licensed - Coursera.org is offering a free online course for anyone interested in the topic, run by experts in Health and Health Education from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School School of Public Health.



Go enroll, learn, and the next time you make a claim about vaccine testing you will be equipped to back it up with actual evidence (which is a great feeling).

August is National Immunization Awareness Month

The title says it all, tomorrow, National Immunization Awareness Month starts and Just the Vax will support vaccination awareness by blogging daily on vaccine related issues. Since a daily blog is about 30x the frequency of our usual activity, some posts might just be a "read this today" reference to other people's blogs. So let's warm up with this post by Orac over at Respectful Insolence, who today exposes Joe Mercola's typical anti-vaccine cherry picking and distortion of data:

Joe Mercola attacks vaccinations again. Film at 11.

and as a reminder why immunization awareness is really important - pertussis soars in the UK with 5 dead babies this year to date:

Whooping cough outbreak spreads to very young babies

Sue Reid propagates MMR Manufactuversy in the Daily Mail

MMR does not cause autism. There is no controversy about this. Medical experts agree. There is no epidemiological connection between MMR and autism (in Denmark, England, Japan, Japan, Japan, Poland, and the United States), papers alleging a connection have been retracted, no one has ever reproduced the "MMR measles virus infiltrates gut, causes autism" claims of Andrew Wakefield and the largest court hearing, the Autism Omnibus trials in the US, has denied all three test cases and appeals for the various "autism is caused by vaccines" hypotheses. The media hype, largely responsible for the drop in MMR uptake in the UK and subsequent mumps and measles outbreaks has died down, parent confidence is rising, and MMR coverage rates are picking up.

It seems this is not common knowledge across Europe though. This March, a provincial court in Rimini, awarded a family €140000 for their son's autism "caused by the MMR". A quick glance at the plaintiff's side reveals an anti-vaccine "dream team":

Their lawyer, Luca Ventaloro, is a well known Italian anti-vaccine advocate (seen here on YouTube explaining how to legally avoid compulsory vaccination). And while their doctor, Massimo Montinari (misspelled as Montanari in the court decision), has no proper biomedical research papers on autism or MMR or vaccines in general, he authored the book "Autismo: i vaccini fra le cause della malattia" and sells his own autism "cure" protocol. Why the defendants, the Italian Ministry of Health, apparently did not present any of the huge body of evidence against any association between MMR and autism is not clear. Ironically, the Cochrane Team reviewing the MMR is Italian. After the ruling, horses bolted and all, it appears that this decision will be appealed. Already, the Italian Federation of Pediatricians has protested and pointed out the poor factual basis on which the court's decision was made.

Now, the lack of evidence-based information in the Italian decision and the bias in the parents' team should be blatantly obvious to anyone with a keyboard and access to the internet. Nevertheless, the Daily Mail, not entirely innocent in the original media campaign against the MMR, joined the ranks of the usual anti-vaccine activists (no links to those guys) and published a sensationalist article:

MMR: A mother's victory. The vast majority of doctors say there is no link between the triple jab and autism, but could an Italian court case reignite this controversial debate?

What they obviously mean is "let's help them reignite the debate, so our web site gets clicks and our paper sells copies - yeah". That kind of fear mongering is highly irresponsible in the light of the lack of evidence for a connection between MMR and autism (see above - interestingly, Autism Omnibus verdicts never made the Daily Mail) and record measles outbreaks across Europe and the UK. A fellow blogger, equally astonished about this inflammatory piece of poorly researched journalism, now revealed the Daily Mail author's motivation. Sue Reid is just simply anti-vaccine minded, conspiracy theories, pharma shill allegations and all, although she seems to recognise that this is not popular and threatens libel action. If the comments are correct, she is no stranger to controversial reporting based on fabricated evidence either.

In any case, the ruling is unlikely to stand very long - the inflammatory language used in the Daily Mail piece is likely to cost some children their health. The current measles outbreak in Merseyside has well over 300 patients, with a hospitalisation rate of 18%. Well done, Sue Reid and the Daily Fail.