I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It's easy.
I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It's easy.
I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It's easy.
Conspiracy Archive
The Coronavirus Conspiracies
Social Media Resources
The idea that vaccines cause autism goes back to a study by Andrew Wakefield who's study claiming an association between vaccines and autism has been retracted [1].
The Lancet issued a statement retracting it [2], The Canadian Medical Association journal explains that the parents of hand-selected children studied were involved in lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers [3], and the NHS also wrote about the study and how 10 of the authors withdrew their support for the paper [4].
The 95 page hearing on the proven and admitted fraud, violation of ethics, scientific misconduct, and conflict of interests are publicly available [5].
The American Journal of Pediatrics published a systematic review on the subject [6].
"Our findings may allay some patient, caregiver, and health care provider concerns. Strength of evidence is high that MMR vaccine is not associated with the onset of autism in children; this conclusion supports findings of all previous reviews on the topic."
On Science Direct from Vaccine Volume 21 is another systematic review looking at vaccines and the hypothesised link to autism and found no evidence supporting it [7].
The JAMA journal contains a third systametic review of vaccines and the hypothesised link to autism [8].
"the highest validity evidence available on the existence of an association, found no difference in the rates of autism or ASD in these 2 populations. This study had sufficient power and was adjusted for some potential confounding variables."
The Cochrane library in 2019 published a massive meta-analysis reviewing 13 studies and around 2 million children. They controlled for bias, confounding variables, funding bias, power of evidence and has an incredible quality control process [9].
"The results showed no evidence supporting an association between MMR immunisation and autism spectrum disorder diagnosis or regression"
Furthermore, SafeMinds is a site that promoted the idea that TCV (Thimerosal containing vaccines) caused autism. They partially funded a study which investigated that hypothesis [10]. The study analysed 79 monkey subject's behaviour for 6 months after variants of vaccine regimens were given, and examined their brains for markers of autism using two separate blinded researchers.
"No behavioral changes were observed in thevaccinated animals, nor were there neuropathological changes inthe cerebellum, hippocampus, or amygdala. This study does not support the hypothesis that thimerosal-containing vaccines and/or the MMR vaccine play a role in the etiology of autism."
The evidence when adjusted for statistical power, confounding variables, use of controls, potential for bias, and quality of study overwhelmingly shows that vaccines do not cause autism.
References:
[1] - https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(97)11096-0/fulltext
[2] - https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(10)60175-4/fulltext
[3] - https://www.cmaj.ca/content/182/4/E199
[4] - https://www.nhs.uk/news/medical-practice/ruling-on-doctor-in-mmr-scare/
[5] - http://www.channel4.com/news/media/2010/01/day28/GMC_Charge_sheet.pdf
[6] - https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/134/2/325.long
[7] - http://skepdic.com/skeptimedia/Jefferson.pdf
[8] - https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/vol/157/pg/628
[9] - https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2015/09/24/1500968112.full.pdf
There's a lot of misinformation about vaccines and the Covid-19 vaccines in general.
The claims of the Pfizer vaccine being unsafe for pregnancy is a red herring. As said on the NHS website: "There's no evidence it's unsafe if you’re pregnant or breastfeeding. But more evidence is needed before you can be offered the vaccine." [1].
In the document used as a "gotcha" (which ironically is on the government website so I guess we're believing the government now): "It is unknown whether COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2has an impact on fertility.", ". COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2is not recommended during pregnancy." [2]. Limited data does not mean that the vaccine will cause harm, or is likely to. That's not what that means.
On a different government page: "Evidence so far reviewed by the MHRA raises no concerns for safety in pregnancy."
"Because of the new formulation of this particular vaccine the MHRA wants to see more non-clinical data before finalising the advice in pregnancy.
It is standard practice when waiting for such data on any medicine, to avoid its use in those who may become pregnant or who are breastfeeding. This will be kept under review as more evidence becomes available." [3].
You can view the Phase 2 and 3 study safety and efficacy results yourself in the study published in the New England Journal of Medicine [4].
"Only 0.2% of vaccine recipients and 0.1% of placebo recipients reported fever (temperature, 38.9 to 40°C) after the first dose, as compared with 0.8% and 0.1%, respectively, after the second dose. Two participants each in the vaccine and placebo groups reported temperatures above 40.0°C."
"Systemic events including fever and chills were observed within the first 1 to 2 days after vaccination and resolved shortly thereafter."
"Safety monitoring will continue for 2 years after administration of the second dose of vaccine."
The FDA released a 53 page document reviewing the data themselves for the EUA, the document of which is public and you can read yourself [6].
The data on pregnancy is limited because women found to be pregnant were excluded from the trial. They intentionally didn't guinea pig on pregnant women and by extension unborn babies.
As for Bells palsey - the occurrences were at the background event rate and 4 of 21000 people contracted it, and by the FDA was ruled not likely from the vaccine.
"there is no clear basis upon which to conclude a causal relationship at this time, but FDA will recommend surveillance for cases of Bell’s palsy with deployment of the vaccine into larger populations"
I've seen people saying they're using people as lab rats and this is untested. Does this look like the behaviour of mad scientists using people as lab rats? It is plainly clear from the trial study and the FDA review that every precaution was made to conduct a robust and ethical trial. The safety results are promising and they are going to me conducting active and passive monitoring for 30 months over multiple studies.
To claim this is some haphazard wing-it operation without concern for safety is beyond incorrect. Hell, the two nurses who suffered reactions on day one had a history of severe reactions to medicine [6]. The advice was shortly after to not give to anyone with a history of reactions to medicine, vaccines, or food.
Gregory Poland told Reuters he thinks they were too cautious even with this advice [7]. To think this is being rolled out without concern or caution is simply false.
As of Christmas eve, 600000 people have been vaccinated [8]. How many unsolicited adverse events have there been? 2 nurses with a history of allergies? I haven't seen any reports which collectively say 10 people have had severe reactions. When the US has vaccinated 1000000 people with 6 allergic reactions [9], that's a tiny percentage.
These cases haven't been fatal whatsoever, and considering the infection fatality rate for COVID-19 is around 0.5-1.0% depending on the country, for the vaccine to be less desirable than catching covid, 160,000 would have had to die by now. They haven't - nowhere close. Hell, let's say the fatality rate for covid is 0.0001% (it's not). 160 would have died by now from the vaccine. They haven't.
As for the timeline of the vaccines, the Director of Translational Biomedical Research at Cambridge University wrote a piece about how 10 years to make a vaccine is not a good thing. That a lot of time is spent waiting for approval, and issues of funding, profitability, and tons of red tape stalling the development process [10].
Florian Krammer is a professor of microbiology who wrote an article in the Nature journal explaining the accelerated vaccine timeline and why it usually takes years to make a vaccine: that the current vaccines are developed using knowledge of previous coronavirus vaccine preclinical trial knowledge [16].
A few months for phase III trials is nothing unprecedented, either. Multiple vaccine phase III trials have lasted only a few months [11][12][13][14][15].
There is no reason to think that the current COVID-19 vaccines are being developed beyond a safe time frame, or that they're not tested. They're not, and they are.
References:
[1] - https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/coronavirus-vaccine/
[4] - https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577
[8] - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/over-600000-people-get-first-dose-of-pfizerbiontech-vaccine
[9] - https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2020-12/slides-12-19/05-COVID-CLARK.pdf