Autism and MMR Vaccinations Not Necessarily Linked

Autism is a frightening word for any parent to hear. When my daughter was two years old, she was barely making any sounds to communicate. Hannah was not showing all the classic signs of autism but did demonstrate some behaviors classic to the condition. As a result, prior to entering a preschool to help her learn to communicate and catch up to her peers, the physician stated she was PDD-NOS. In other words my daughter was on the pervasive developmental disorder spectrum-not fully autistic but not fully what is termed as normal.

One year after learning of Hannah's diagnosis, I learned I have Cowden Syndrome. The following year I learned PTEN mutations such as those in Cowden Syndrome are apparently correlated with autism. When Hannah was diagnosed with my same mutation last year, I knew the likely cause of her PDD.

It is human nature to want to know the cause of a disabling condition. Some scientists choose to focus on heart disease research while others choose to work on AIDS research. Still other scientists choose cancer as their focus and some choose autism. Whatever condition a scientist or researcher focuses on shows an innate bias from the beginning. It is difficult to perform studies on human beings and far too easy to falsify data. Apparently, Andrew Wakefield and his colleagues (1998) falsified some data to show twelve of the children in their study did not present developmental problems prior to MMR vaccinations but developed them afterward.

Recently published analysis by Brian Dear shows at least five of those children had been diagnosed with previous developmental problems before the vaccinations. Dear also claims Wakefield was paid $675,000 from a law firm that wanted to launch a class action lawsuit against the MMR vaccine. The charge against Wakefield was severe enough for the study to be dropped from The Lancet (the journal it was published in back in 1998 and dropped during the year 2007) and Wakefield to be dropped from the U.K. medical registry in May 2010.

For the record, Andrew Wakefield continues to claim his findings were not a lie.

The study by Wakefield and colleagues went beyond being an ethical failure. Certainly parents of those who have autism were hurt. A response by Susan Pieples whose son and father are affected by the condition demonstrates this fact. Pieples responded to the Wakefield study by saying it has set research back one hundred years and parents can no longer use the Wakefield study to say it was not their fault their children have autism.

Parents who have children with developmental and physical problems often needlessly blame themselves and when no one specific cause is known the blame may be worse. I know the cause of my daughter's PDD was something she inherited from me. Having this information does cause guilt but it is empowering to know why she has PDD. Parents of children who have autism typically do not know why their children are affected by the condition. Thinking one has the answer through a vaccination/autism link is empowering. Learning the link was false takes them back to the uncertainty.

Prior to the conception and birth of my children (2002-2005), I was an online mom's message board addict. I met many mothers against vaccinations. Now my mind wonders how many of those children went through measles, mumps, or rubella needlessly. The study by Wakefield and colleagues did more than hurt parents of children who have autism-it no doubt caused some children to have a serious illness he or she did not need. Science should be a look for truth but at least with the knowledge this study was falsified what we do know has became less tainted.