Dr. Offit: The Science is Clear, Vacc...

Dr. Offit: The Science is Clear, Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism

There are 39 comments on the CBS Local story from Apr 7, 2014, titled Dr. Offit: The Science is Clear, Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism. In it, CBS Local reports that:

Dom Giordano talked to Dr. Paul Offit today on Talk Radio 1210 WPHT about his book, Deadly Choices, and the damage being done to children by the anti-vaccine movement.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CBS Local.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
sam

Saint-hubert, Canada

#1 Apr 7, 2014
this coming from the one selling vaccines !!!! no conflict of interest

vaccines=autism+offit

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#2 Apr 7, 2014
"When the science isn’t on your side, you resort to ad hominem attacks" very true and there's plenty examples right here on this forum of just that!

And just what do you think Offit's specialty is? Which is why he got the CDC job, hello. Although he invented a vaccine, he no longer holds the patent, hello. And unlike Wakefield or McCarthy, Offit donated the royalties of his book to a children's hospital.
A Friend

Cottage Grove, MN

#6 Apr 8, 2014
Dr. Offit tells us that science says vaccines do not cause autism. OK, what science would that be. Because there is a lot of science, peer reviewed just like Offit's, that says something different. If you examine the 16 studies that Offit likes to quote, they can all be discounted because of poor design, lack of controls, small sample size, and conflicts of interest in funding of the study. And with the studies that show vaccines can cause brain injury or encephalopathy, some of them can be discounted as well. Logic would tell us that there is not enough evidence either way to proving with certainty. But there are many, many kids being injured because of their vaccines each year and Offit looks at them as collateral damage.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#7 Apr 9, 2014
If one examines any of the studies, logic would tell us we'd have to look at each individually, not make a blank statement lumping them all together. That's already been done on this forum of the claims anti vaxxers have of their 21 studies, or is it 29. They keep changing the number.

Vaccines have been around long before Offit ever was. Health officials and scientists for generations have all shared the same opinion and have science to back up those opinions. Some vaccines can cause encephalopathy, but that's only due to the childhood disease itself having that risk. One has a higher risk of encephalopathy from contracting a childhood illness from another than from the vaccine since the vaccine only contains a small amount to build immunity. The majority who have had vaccines have experience no injury at all. When people make claims of 'many many', they never can back up that actual figure.
Logic tells us the majority who have had vaccines do not also have autism.
ric99

Grimsby, UK

#11 Apr 10, 2014
A Friend wrote:
Dr. Offit tells us that science says vaccines do not cause autism. OK, what science would that be. Because there is a lot of science, peer reviewed just like Offit's, that says something different. If you examine the 16 studies that Offit likes to quote, they can all be discounted because of poor design, lack of controls, small sample size, and conflicts of interest in funding of the study.
What utter rubbish. Where are the peer reviewed studies that definitively show that vaccines cause autism? They don't exist.

As for the studies showing no link between vaccines and autism, they do NOT have "poor design, lack of controls, small sample size". Take (for example the 2002 NEJM published study with a sample size of over half a million kids, which clearly shows that the autism rate is the same for unvaccinated kids as for vaccinated kids. For those with ASDs, at the time of being diagnosed:-
16.7% had not been vaccinated.
1% had been diagnosed within 6 months of vaccination.
6.7% had been diagnosed between 6 and 11 months after vaccination.
7% had been diagnosed between 12 and 17 months after vaccination.
10% had been diagnosed between 18 and 23 months after vaccination.
13% had been diagnosed between 24 and 29 months after vaccination.
10.4% had been diagnosed between 30 and 35 months after vaccination.
28.5% had been diagnosed between 36 and 59 months after vaccination.
6.7% had been diagnosed more than 60 months after vaccination.

So much for the contention that large numbers of kids regress into autism very soon after vaccination. The statistics from this study clearly show that this is not the case.
CENSORSHIP

Winnipeg, Canada

#14 Apr 11, 2014
A Friend wrote:
Dr. Offit tells us that science says vaccines do not cause autism. OK, what science would that be. Because there is a lot of science, peer reviewed just like Offit's, that says something different. If you examine the 16 studies that Offit likes to quote, they can all be discounted because of poor design, lack of controls, small sample size, and conflicts of interest in funding of the study. And with the studies that show vaccines can cause brain injury or encephalopathy, some of them can be discounted as well. Logic would tell us that there is not enough evidence either way to proving with certainty. But there are many, many kids being injured because of their vaccines each year and Offit looks at them as collateral damage.
Offit said a baby could handle 100,000 vaccines in one day. That guy is psycho
ric99

Ruskington, UK

#15 Apr 11, 2014
Offit NEVER said a baby could handle 100,000 vaccines in one day. Where is the Winnipeg dummy's evidence? He doesn't have any, as usual.
CENSORSHIP

Winnipeg, Canada

#16 Apr 11, 2014
ric99 wrote:
Offit NEVER said a baby could handle 100,000 vaccines in one day. Where is the Winnipeg dummy's evidence? He doesn't have any, as usual.
Oh yea, read this including the comments. therefusers.com/refusers-newsroom/dr-paul-off...

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#17 Apr 11, 2014
Makes no difference the amount of vaccines on the vaccine schedule or 100K vaccines. Of course anti vaxxers missed the point, which is the majority who get the recommended schedule do not experience severe side effects. Hello. They also don't get autism. Hello. And by the way, every human is exposed to millions of germs and bacteria every day.

Did anyone bother to click the link at the bottom of Ross Coe's article? Where it says "Read the article"? You'll love it. This is what Ross Coe bases evidence on.
Starts with vaccines

Winnipeg, Canada

#18 Apr 11, 2014
friend wrote:
Makes no difference the amount of vaccines on the vaccine schedule or 100K vaccines. Of course anti vaxxers missed the point, which is the majority who get the recommended schedule do not experience severe side effects. Hello. They also don't get autism. Hello. And by the way, every human is exposed to millions of germs and bacteria every day.
Did anyone bother to click the link at the bottom of Ross Coe's article? Where it says "Read the article"? You'll love it. This is what Ross Coe bases evidence on.
I said read it. I never said anything about evidence. Nice job making up lies as usual
ric99

Spalding, UK

#19 Apr 12, 2014
So the Winnipeg (Ross Coe) dummy is admitting that he doesn't have any evidence concerning what Offit said. Here is the reality in black and white print:-

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/...

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#20 Apr 12, 2014
I believe Offit did make the statement, I watched the interview however, anti vaxxers take what he said out of context and then added to it such as the claims Offit said he did studies on it. All normal expected anti vaxxer fabrication and your commom run of the mill anti vaxxer believes it at face value.

The fact is regardless if there was 100K vaccines, of the current childhood schedule, the majority do not experience severe side effects nor does the majority have autism. That's something anti vaxxers just cant grasp nor will they ever.
ricGOOF99

Winnipeg, Canada

#21 Apr 12, 2014
ric99 wrote:
So the Winnipeg (Ross Coe) dummy is admitting that he doesn't have any evidence concerning what Offit said. Here is the reality in black and white print:-
http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/...
I admit nothing of the sort 14 year old goof. Your link is trash as usual. Who said he published a study showing children could handle 100,000 vaccines? Wasn't me goof. But Offit dad say it, later revised to 10,000, but even 10,000 shows how dangerous his thinking is.
ricGOOF99

Winnipeg, Canada

#22 Apr 12, 2014
friend wrote:
I believe Offit did make the statement, I watched the interview however, anti vaxxers take what he said out of context and then added to it such as the claims Offit said he did studies on it. All normal expected anti vaxxer fabrication and your commom run of the mill anti vaxxer believes it at face value.
The fact is regardless if there was 100K vaccines, of the current childhood schedule, the majority do not experience severe side effects nor does the majority have autism. That's something anti vaxxers just cant grasp nor will they ever.
Wow another goof. Out of context, you're an expert on that.
ricTRASHSCIENCE9 9

Winnipeg, Canada

#23 Apr 13, 2014
ric99 wrote:
<quoted text>
What utter rubbish. Where are the peer reviewed studies that definitively show that vaccines cause autism? They don't exist.
As for the studies showing no link between vaccines and autism, they do NOT have "poor design, lack of controls, small sample size". Take (for example the 2002 NEJM published study with a sample size of over half a million kids, which clearly shows that the autism rate is the same for unvaccinated kids as for vaccinated kids. For those with ASDs, at the time of being diagnosed:-
16.7% had not been vaccinated.
1% had been diagnosed within 6 months of vaccination.
6.7% had been diagnosed between 6 and 11 months after vaccination.
7% had been diagnosed between 12 and 17 months after vaccination.
10% had been diagnosed between 18 and 23 months after vaccination.
13% had been diagnosed between 24 and 29 months after vaccination.
10.4% had been diagnosed between 30 and 35 months after vaccination.
28.5% had been diagnosed between 36 and 59 months after vaccination.
6.7% had been diagnosed more than 60 months after vaccination.
So much for the contention that large numbers of kids regress into autism very soon after vaccination. The statistics from this study clearly show that this is not the case.
complete crapola, paid for by pharma
ric99

Grimsby, UK

#25 Apr 13, 2014
It is interesting to note that the Winnipeg (Ross Coe) dummy's first link only includes Table 1 from the Danish study. Could this be because they don't want you to know what is included in Table 2?

The figures highlighted in the link (in order to show higher rates of autism among vaccinated kids) includes in the numbers vaccinated those who were diagnosed with autism BEFORE vaccination. This is made clear in the notes under Table 2, which states:-
"The distribution of cases of autistic disorder or other autistic-spectrum disorders according to vaccination status differs from that in Table 1 because, in this analysis, children who were vaccinated after the disorder had been diagnosed were classified according to their vaccination status at the time of the diagnosis (i.e. as unvaccinated)."

According to the figures from Table 2, children who were unvaccinated were 8.7% more likely to be diagnosed with autism than those children who were vaccinated BEFORE diagnosis.

Ross Coe has been debunked yet again.
ricIDIOT99

Winnipeg, Canada

#26 Apr 13, 2014
ric99 wrote:
It is interesting to note that the Winnipeg (Ross Coe) dummy's first link only includes Table 1 from the Danish study. Could this be because they don't want you to know what is included in Table 2?
The figures highlighted in the link (in order to show higher rates of autism among vaccinated kids) includes in the numbers vaccinated those who were diagnosed with autism BEFORE vaccination. This is made clear in the notes under Table 2, which states:-
"The distribution of cases of autistic disorder or other autistic-spectrum disorders according to vaccination status differs from that in Table 1 because, in this analysis, children who were vaccinated after the disorder had been diagnosed were classified according to their vaccination status at the time of the diagnosis (i.e. as unvaccinated)."
According to the figures from Table 2, children who were unvaccinated were 8.7% more likely to be diagnosed with autism than those children who were vaccinated BEFORE diagnosis.
Ross Coe has been debunked yet again.
Not if its you. your analysis is flawed, twisted and untrue. try again.
ric99

Lincoln, UK

#27 Apr 13, 2014
It's not my analysis that is "flawed, twisted and untrue". I am just quoting what the NEJM published study states in print. Is the Winnipeg (Ross Coe) dummy so stupid that he is claiming that a vaccination administered AFTER the diagnosis of autism would have been the cause of that autism? That is what inclusion of those vaccination events in with the pre-autism vaccination figures would imply. Perhaps the Winnipeg dummy believes in time travel.

Ross Coe has been debunked yet again.
More ric99 nonsense

Winnipeg, Canada

#28 Apr 13, 2014
ric99 wrote:
It's not my analysis that is "flawed, twisted and untrue". I am just quoting what the NEJM published study states in print. Is the Winnipeg (Ross Coe) dummy so stupid that he is claiming that a vaccination administered AFTER the diagnosis of autism would have been the cause of that autism? That is what inclusion of those vaccination events in with the pre-autism vaccination figures would imply. Perhaps the Winnipeg dummy believes in time travel.
Ross Coe has been debunked yet again.
from you its all nonsense. just like friend you lie and twist things to sound like you know something. But its just useless drivel.
ric99

Lincoln, UK

#29 Apr 13, 2014
Desperation is setting in with the Winnipeg (Ross Coe) dummy. He doesn't dare check what is written in the NEJM published study, because he knows that he will find my quote:-
"The distribution of cases of autistic disorder or other autistic-spectrum disorders according to vaccination status differs from that in Table 1 because, in this analysis, children who were vaccinated after the disorder had been diagnosed were classified according to their vaccination status at the time of the diagnosis (i.e. as unvaccinated)."
exactly where I said it was. This would drive him completely mad, if he wasn't mad enough already. Send for the men in white coats.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Autism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Talk looks at history of autism Feb 17 Old Lamp Lighter 7
News Baby brain scans may reveal autism risk: study Feb 17 Wakefield was RIGHT 1
News Actor joins Robert Kennedy Jr. on panel discuss... Feb 17 Wakefield was RIGHT 1
News Aluminum, Fluoride and Glyphosate - A Toxic Tri... Feb 13 SUPPORTS WAKEFIEL... 1
Looking for Similar Mothers of children w/ Auti... (Jul '08) Feb 9 Amber 125
News Should we treat anti-vaxxers with more respect? Feb 8 freedomOFchoice 1
News Hundreds Of Health Groups Plead With Trump To L... Feb 8 freedomOFchoice 1
More from around the web