Anti-Vaxxer Group’s $250,000 Study Proves Vaccines Don’t Cause Autism

infants-and-young-children-need-to-be-vaccinated-because-the-diseases-prevented-by-vaccination-725x479
Public Domain Image available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial license.

Despite conclusive scientific proof that childhood vaccines are in no way harmful to children and do not cause autism, there remain some in the anti-vaxxer movement who continue to cling to their beliefs that all vaccinations are a danger to anyone who receives them.

One of these groups, SafeMinds, recently financed a quarter-million dollar study they thought might prove a link between vaccinations and autism. The results of their study: No link between vaccines and autism was proven.

Between 2003 and 2013, SafeMinds provided researchers from the University of Texas Southwestern School of Medicine, the University of Washington, the Johnson Center for Child Health & Development, and other research institutions with approximately $250,000 for the purpose of conducting a long-term investigation which would evaluate the behavioral and brain changes of baby rhesus macaques when the animals were administered a standard course of childhood vaccines. The researchers concluded the vaccines–all of which contained thimerosal– did not cause any brain or behavioral changes in the primates. Anti-vaccinaton groups are fond of claiming that thimerosal– a mercury-based preservative—is  linked to autism. Thimerosal was removed from most vaccines in the late 1990s. But the researchers wanted to study its potential health effects anyway.

SafeMinds is not pleased with the results. Representatives from the group say the findings contradict an earlier pilot study and interim progress reports the organization received from the researchers. In other words, if the findings don’t support your hypothesis, they must be flawed. Do these people even understand the basics of the scientific method?

Dr. Laura Hewitson, director of research for the Johnson Center for Child Health & Development, commented on the study, which she was a part of:

“As you can see, we have done everything possible to ensure the integrity of the data. My co-authors and I stand by our published findings. The comprehensive nature of the current study underscores why the findings from the pilot study should be interpreted with an abundance of caution, given the small number of animals included.”

Nevertheless, Sallie Bernard, president of SafeMinds, continues to cling to her now disproven theory, saying:

“We feel that embedded within these data sets there are animals that have potentially an adverse reaction to this vaccine schedule that would mirror what happens in human infants. The majority who get vaccines are fine, but we believe there is a subset that have an adverse reaction to their vaccines. By looking at the raw data, not data in aggregate, we may be able to identify the subgroup that had that reaction.”

And if you attach wings to pigs, they might one day learn how to fly.