Re: Government Concedes Vaccine-Autism Case in Federal Court

"This just goes to show the vaccine mongers attacks on people who choose to live without vaccines is wrong."

No, it does not.

First of all, the government did not agree that autism is caused by vaccination. According to the very low standard for legal plausibility in this setting (51% likelihood), the panel agreed that vaccines were a likely cause of injury in this case and compensation should be awarded. The standard for scientific evidence is far more rigorous, and this case doesn't pass the test for making any such conclusions.

It was also noted in this case that the child involved had had repeated infections, as well as a mitochondrial disorder that very probably has a genetic basis. One recent study suggests that this type of rare disorder may predispose children to brain injury due to different causes:

"The authors -- who reported on a case-study of the same autism claim conceded in Vaccine Court -- noted that "children who have (mitochondrial-related) dysfunctional cellular energy metabolism might be more prone to undergo autistic regression between 18 and 30 months of age if they also have infections or immunizations at the same time."


http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/02/incredible_shrinking_causation_clai...


But infections aren't a concern of antivaxers, whether they kill, maim or cause autism. Their tunnel vision only allows them to focus on vaccination.

This case does not involve classic autism of the sort that antivaxers are always trying to pin on immunization.

Antivaxers like David Kirby (writing at huffingtonpost.com) have been wrong so often about theories like mercury-in-vaccines-causes-autism, you have to wonder how people can take them seriously.

Tweet