http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7333/315/a?view=full&pmid=11834548
Controversial new research showing that many children with both autism and bowel disease have the measles virus in their intestinal tissue has fuelled further debate over the possible link between the illness and the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine <<... although no such link is proved in the research.

The paper, to be published shortly by the specialist journalMolecular
Pathology (which is co-owned by the BMJ Publishing Group) and already
available on its website (<http://mp.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/54/6/DC1), was highlighted by a television programme (Panorama, BBC1, 3 Feb) on the safety of the MMR vaccine.

It looked at tissue samples of 91 children from the Royal Free Hospital, London, who had both autism and inflammatory bowel disease. Seventy five of the samples tested positive for the presence of measles virus in intestinal tissue, compared with five of 70 controls.

Professor John O'Leary, of the department of pathology at Coombe Women's Hospital, Dublin, who undertook the analysis, emphasised that the results did not prove that any of the children acquired their condition as a result of being vaccinated.

"You can't say at the moment that it is linked to the vaccine," he said. "There are several strains of the virus out there. They could have picked it up from the wild virus." But he thought it unlikely that parents would have missed measles symptoms in their child. "A measles rash is pretty classic," he said. "The child is irritable and gets a fever. The parents would probably have spotted that." He said the paper had been very carefully prepared, because this was such a major public health issue. "It is fair to say these children are not representative of autism per se," he said. "It is a very distinctive subset. The important point we are trying to get across is that it is a biological association."

Alan Morris, reader in the department of biological sciences, Warwick University, and author of the journal's commentary on the paper, described it as "interesting." "The paper is technically good. The data look fine, but it is looking at an unusual subset of children and it proves nothing. Its implications will only come out in the wash." But one of the paper's authors, Dr Andrew Wakefield, a former senior lecturer at the Royal Free Hospital and the main advocate for a link between the MMR vaccine and autism (Lancet 1998;351:637-41[Medline] </cgi/external_ref?access_num=9500320&link_type=MED), said the study raised important questions.

"We don't know whether it is the vaccine strain or not," he admitted, "but these children's only exposure has been to the vaccine strain. None of them had a history of measles. It takes the science to an entirely new level."

Dr Wakefield worked at the Royal Free Hospital, where the samples came from, until last November, when he was told that his research was "no longer in line with the department of medicine's research strategy."
* * *

What it DOES Prove
http://bmj.com/cgi/eletters/324/7333/315/a#19463
The response I have read proves one thing. The status quo is being defended "at all odds" while kids continue to be adversely affected by something which no-one is prepared to look into seriously. Most of the responses to Wakefield's work and his potentially alarming findings has been a rather shameful reactive and data-fudging repetitive reassertion of "It is all OK " when it clearly is not.

While it is equally clear that the majority do not get adversely affected, until we know what it is about the subgroup who do report time-associated reactions, it surely behoves the companies who make these vaccines or the governments who advocate them in such a fear-engendering way, to respond with research designed to find out why. Otherwise the charge that all is directed to protecting drug company profit will hang around.

My reading suggests that those with a family history of G-protein related diseases are more likely to react. Many of the patients I have, who complain of fundamental changes in their childrens character or of the onset of a condition classifiable as part of the autistic spectrum also report night blindess in one of the parents. This issue has already been addressed by Dr Mary Megson, but the association and its implications remains unaddressed by the research community unless I am mistaken.

The statisticians and vaccine advocates always seem to forget that STATISTICS RELATING TO VACCINE SAFETY MEAN ABSOLUTLEY NOTHING when your child is affected FOR LIFE. Until such independant rigourous and exhaustive research has been conducted into this issue along with other vaccine associated concerns I remain supportive of parents rights to decide whether or not to vaccinate their children.

Philip Stowell, Brisbane, Australia.
GP and father of two boys

www.feat.org