Quote:
Originally Posted by Varied A
I would be genuinely interested, as whilst I do know of some of the ethically dodgy things which went on during sample selection (which, funnily enough, aren't mentioned in the paper), I've never heard a clear and unbiased account of why the actual research (or its interpretation) is flawed. As such an expert, I'm sure you could enlighten me!
|
One of the interesting things, IMO, about critiques of the original research is that they tend to consider the alleged link between the measles virus and ASDs/GI disorders in a very unidirectional way. What I mean by that is that discussion focuses very much on whether an abnormal response to the measles virus could cause autism (to use blunt terms). What there is very little discussion of - or at least I have never been able to find any - is whether an existing (e.g. genetic) predisposition to autism could cause an abnormal response to the measles virus. The phenomenon of abnormal, heightened, immune response in autistic children is well documented, and yet there seems to have been no orchestrated attempt to investigate whether the autism Wakefield was observing in post-vaccination children was causal of an abnormal immune response which then triggered the autoimmune GI problems, rather than consequential to the vaccination (or contact with wild measles).
I guess the media storm that ensued, and the wild-eyed response of the DH, have probably firmly squashed the likelihood that anyone is going to risk their career by taking this research any further for a good long while, which, IMO, is a far sorrier consequence of the whole affair than the tongue-biting frustration poor GPs are having to labour under.