Intro by Ilene
I have already been called to task for posting this article because it suggests that science has disproven the notion that vaccines have any connection to the increase in autism rates in the last several decades.
Towards the end of the article below, Chris Mooney writes: "So is there a case study of science denial that largely occupies the political left? Yes: the claim that childhood vaccines are causing an epidemic of autism. Its most famous proponents are an environmentalist (Robert F. Kennedy Jr.) and numerous Hollywood celebrities…Vaccine denial has all the hallmarks of a belief system that’s not amenable to refutation. Over the past decade, the assertion that childhood vaccines are driving autism rates has been undermined by multiple epidemiological studies—as well as the simple fact that autism rates continue to rise, even though the alleged offending agent in vaccines (a mercury-based preservative called thimerosal) has long since been removed."
While I have not been thoroughly keeping up with the research in this area, I’m not convinced that vaccines (and thimerosal) aren’t a contributing factor to some cases/subgroups of autism. So maybe vaccine defenders are as guilty of the same rigid belief systems as vaccine denialists. Sadly, many medical studies are flawed, and I have not seen a definitive study on thimerosal’s effects on neurological development and autism rates; such a study would now be unethical to conduct.
Many years ago, I remember the medical community – and food processing companies – decided that switching from butter to margarine, to lower saturated fat intake, was the healthful way to go, inspired by the Framingham study. Only years later did further research show that transfats are worse than saturated fats. So I guess the margarine defenders of 30 years ago would have called me a margarine denialist.
A quick search on thimerosal and autism brought up this press release: Vaccine-Autism Researcher Indicted for Fraud:
SILVER SPRING, Md., April 19, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Based on last week’s indictment of vaccine-autism researcher Dr. Poul Thorsen for money laundering and mail fraud, the Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs (CoMeD), a Maryland-based non-profit organization, is calling for further investigation related to the incident.
Thorsen, a Danish scientist, has already been cited for academic misconduct by Aarhus University in Denmark and is now charged with embezzling a $1 million grant for autism from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). For several years, Thorsen was involved in influential studies defending the controversial use of Thimerosal (about 50% mercury by weight) as a preservative in several vaccines.
Thimerosal has been linked to autism and other neurological diseases by numerous studies. Dr. Paul G. King, Scientific Advisor for CoMeD, explains, "We need to consider the ever-growing body of toxicity studies linking the mercury in Thimerosal to severe neurological deficits, like autism, and to immune-system and mitochondrial damage. Such studies have shown that the level of Thimerosal in vaccines is not safe." Continue here >
The Science of Why We Don’t Believe Science
And since Festinger’s day, an array of new discoveries in psychology and neuroscience has further demonstrated how our preexisting beliefs, far more than any new facts, can skew our thoughts and even color what we consider our most dispassionate and logical conclusions. This tendency toward so-called "motivated reasoning" helps explain why we find groups so polarized over matters where the evidence is so unequivocal: climate change, vaccines, "death panels," the birthplace and religion of the president (PDF), and much else. It would seem that expecting people to be convinced by the facts flies in the face of, you know, the facts.
The theory of motivated reasoning builds on a key insight of modern neuroscience (PDF): Reasoning is actually suffused with emotion (or what researchers often call "affect"). Not only are the two inseparable, but our positive or negative feelings about people, things, and ideas arise much more rapidly than our conscious thoughts, in a matter of milliseconds—fast enough to detect with an EEG device, but long before we’re aware of it. That shouldn’t be surprising: Evolution required us to react very quickly to stimuli in our environment. It’s a "basic human survival skill," explains political scientist Arthur Lupia of the University of Michigan. We push threatening information away; we pull friendly information close. We apply fight-or-flight reflexes not only to predators, but to data itself.
We’re not driven only by emotions, of course—we also reason, deliberate. But reasoning comes later, works slower—and even then, it doesn’t take place in an emotional vacuum. Rather, our quick-fire emotions can set us on a course of thinking that’s highly biased, especially on topics we care a great deal about.
Full article here >
H/tip Simoleon Sense
