Search

This article traces the origin, sustenance and implications of a persistent rumour that is responsible for low measles mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccination uptake in the Somali diaspora in a number of countries across the globe. The rumour stipulates that the MMR vaccine - the silent shot - causes autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Although the association between MMR and ASD is non-causal, and various public health initiatives have promoted health information campaigns, the rumour continues to circulate in the Somali diaspora in many countries, including Sweden. This paper shows that there are valid reasons for this. The findings from this paper draw on a systematic scoping review and qualitative interview data from Sweden. The results show that the Somali community experiences higher than average rates of ASD compared to the general population. Moreover, ASD does not exist in the Somali language or their home country, is considered a Western disease that only affects Somali children in the diaspora, and is a highly stigmatised disease. Also, the Somali diaspora has had negative experiences with ASD diagnosis and care. The rumour has been sustained by the absence of an answer to their ASD fear and through active diaspora networks on social media. The network that surrounds the rumour has arguably further helped to create an epistemic community for a community whose concerns have been silenced.

Background: The vaccine/autism controversy has caused vast scientific and public confusion, and it has set back research and education into genuine vaccine-induced neurological disorders. The great strawman of autism has been so emphasized by the vaccine industry that it, and it alone, often appears in authoritative discussions of adverse effects of the MMR and other vaccines. By dismissing the chimerical vaccine/autism controversy, vaccine defenders often dismiss all genuinely neurological aftereffects of the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) and other vaccines, including well-documented events, such as relatively rare cases of encephalopathy and encephalitis., Objective: This report explains that autism is not a physical or neurological disorder. It is not caused by injury or disease of the brain. It is a developmental disorder that has no physical origins and no physical symptoms. It is extremely unlikely that vaccines are causing autism; but it is extremely likely that they are causing more neurological damage than currently appreciated, some of it resulting in psychosocial disabilities that can be confused with autism and other psychosocial disorders. This confusion between a developmental, psychosocial disorder and a physical neurological disease has played into the hands of interest groups who want to deny that vaccines have any neurological and associated neuropsychiatric effects., Methods: A review of the scientific literature, textbooks, and related media commentary is integrated with basic clinical knowledge., Results: This report shows how scientific sources have used the vaccine/autism controversy to avoid dealing with genuine neurological risks associated with vaccines and summarizes evidence that vaccines, including the MMR, can cause serious neurological disorders. Manufacturers have been allowed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to gain vaccine approval without placebo-controlled clinical trials., Conclusions: The misleading vaccine autism controversy must be set aside in favor of examining actual neurological harms associated with vaccines, including building on existing research that has been ignored. Manufacturers of vaccines must be required to conduct placebo-controlled clinical studies for existing vaccines and for government approval of new vaccines. Many probable or confirmed neurological adverse events occur within a few days or weeks after immunization and could be detected if the trials were sufficiently large. Contrary to current opinion, large, long-term placebo-controlled trials of existing and new vaccines would be relatively easy and safe to conduct.

Since Wakefield et al. (1998), the public was exposed to mixed information surrounding the claim that measles-mumps-rubella vaccine causes autism. A persistent trend to delay the vaccination during 1998-2011 in the US was driven by children of college-educated mothers, suggesting that these mothers held biases against the vaccine influenced by the early unfounded claim. Consistent with confirmatory bias, exposures to negative information about the vaccine strengthened their biases more than exposures to positive information attenuated them. Positive online information, however, had strong impacts on vaccination decisions, suggesting that online dissemination of vaccine-safety information may help tackle the sticky misinformation., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Autism is a developmental disability that can cause significant social, communication, and behavioral challenges. A report published in 1998, but subsequently retracted by the journal, suggested that measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine causes autism. However, autism is a neurodevelopmental condition that has a strong genetic component with genesis before one year of age, when MMR vaccine is typically administered. Several epidemiologic studies have not found an association between MMR vaccination and autism, including a study that found that MMR vaccine was not associated with an increased risk of autism even among high-risk children whose older siblings had autism. Despite strong evidence of its safety, some parents are still hesitant to accept MMR vaccination of their children. Decreasing acceptance of MMR vaccination has led to outbreaks or resurgence of measles. Health-care providers have a vital role in maintaining confidence in vaccination and preventing suffering, disability, and death from measles and other vaccine-preventable diseases.

While previous studies in health communication have examined online news media regarding autism, there is a lack of research that critically examines how such media representations may stigmatize autism and seeks to eliminate the condition, particularly in the context of the resurging measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine-autism controversy. To address this gap in the literature, this study analyzes 153 articles that engage the MMR vaccine-autism controversy from the top 10 online news sources in the U.S. from September 2015 through July 2017. It draws from Kafer's (2013) work in Feminist, Crip, Queer , using a lens of crip futurism to interpret three major narrative themes: a death and survival narrative that purports autism as a worst-case scenario, a societal problem narrative, and a preventative narrative that seeks to eliminate the condition. These themes suggest that online news media narratives about autism surrounding the autism-MMR controversy play into stereotypes about autism, including stigmatization and prioritization of preventive behaviors and cures over supporting the lived experiences of autistic individuals. Continued research on the impact of online media portrayals of autism specifically, and disability in health contexts generally, is called for.

Background: The hypothesized link between the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism continues to cause concern and challenge vaccine uptake., Objective: To evaluate whether the MMR vaccine increases the risk for autism in children, subgroups of children, or time periods after vaccination., Design: Nationwide cohort study., Setting: Denmark., Participants: 657 461 children born in Denmark from 1999 through 31 December 2010, with follow-up from 1 year of age and through 31 August 2013., Measurements: Danish population registries were used to link information on MMR vaccination, autism diagnoses, other childhood vaccines, sibling history of autism, and autism risk factors to children in the cohort. Survival analysis of the time to autism diagnosis with Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios of autism according to MMR vaccination status, with adjustment for age, birth year, sex, other childhood vaccines, sibling history of autism, and autism risk factors (based on a disease risk score)., Results: During 5 025 754 person-years of follow-up, 6517 children were diagnosed with autism (incidence rate, 129.7 per 100 000 person-years). Comparing MMR-vaccinated with MMR-unvaccinated children yielded a fully adjusted autism hazard ratio of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.85 to 1.02). Similarly, no increased risk for autism after MMR vaccination was consistently observed in subgroups of children defined according to sibling history of autism, autism risk factors (based on a disease risk score) or other childhood vaccinations, or during specified time periods after vaccination., Limitation: No individual medical charts were reviewed., Conclusion: The study strongly supports that MMR vaccination does not increase the risk for autism, does not trigger autism in susceptible children, and is not associated with clustering of autism cases after vaccination. It adds to previous studies through significant additional statistical power and by addressing hypotheses of susceptible subgroups and clustering of cases., Primary Funding Source: Novo Nordisk Foundation and Danish Ministry of Health.

Importance: Despite research showing no link between the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism spectrum disorders (ASD), beliefs that the vaccine causes autism persist, leading to lower vaccination levels. Parents who already have a child with ASD may be especially wary of vaccinations., Objective: To report ASD occurrence by MMR vaccine status in a large sample of US children who have older siblings with and without ASD., Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study using an administrative claims database associated with a large commercial health plan. Participants included children continuously enrolled in the health plan from birth to at least 5 years of age during 2001-2012 who also had an older sibling continuously enrolled for at least 6 months between 1997 and 2012., Exposures: MMR vaccine receipt (0, 1, 2 doses) between birth and 5 years of age., Main Outcomes and Measures: ASD status defined as 2 claims with a diagnosis code in any position for autistic disorder or other specified pervasive developmental disorder (PDD) including Asperger syndrome, or unspecified PDD (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification 299.0x, 299.8x, 299.9x)., Results: Of 95,727 children with older siblings, 994 (1.04%) were diagnosed with ASD and 1929 (2.01%) had an older sibling with ASD. Of those with older siblings with ASD, 134 (6.9%) had ASD, vs 860 (0.9%) children with unaffected siblings (P < .001). MMR vaccination rates (≥1 dose) were 84% (n = 78,564) at age 2 years and 92% (n = 86,063) at age 5 years for children with unaffected older siblings, vs 73% (n = 1409) at age 2 years and 86% (n = 1660) at age 5 years for children with affected siblings. MMR vaccine receipt was not associated with an increased risk of ASD at any age. For children with older siblings with ASD, at age 2, the adjusted relative risk (RR) of ASD for 1 dose of MMR vaccine vs no vaccine was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.49-1.18; P = .22), and at age 5, the RR of ASD for 2 doses compared with no vaccine was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.31-1.01; P = .052). For children whose older siblings did not have ASD, at age 2, the adjusted RR of ASD for 1 dose was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.67-1.20; P = .50) and at age 5, the RR of ASD for 2 doses was 1.12 (95% CI, 0.78-1.59; P = .55)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this large sample of privately insured children with older siblings, receipt of the MMR vaccine was not associated with increased risk of ASD, regardless of whether older siblings had ASD. These findings indicate no harmful association between MMR vaccine receipt and ASD even among children already at higher risk for ASD.

There has been enormous debate regarding the possibility of a link between childhood vaccinations and the subsequent development of autism. This has in recent times become a major public health issue with vaccine preventable diseases increasing in the community due to the fear of a 'link' between vaccinations and autism. We performed a meta-analysis to summarise available evidence from case-control and cohort studies on this topic (MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar up to April, 2014). Eligible studies assessed the relationship between vaccine administration and the subsequent development of autism or autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Two reviewers extracted data on study characteristics, methods, and outcomes. Disagreement was resolved by consensus with another author. Five cohort studies involving 1,256,407 children, and five case-control studies involving 9,920 children were included in this analysis. The cohort data revealed no relationship between vaccination and autism (OR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.06) or ASD (OR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.20), nor was there a relationship between autism and MMR (OR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.01), or thimerosal (OR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.31), or mercury (Hg) (OR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.93 to 1.07). Similarly the case-control data found no evidence for increased risk of developing autism or ASD following MMR, Hg, or thimerosal exposure when grouped by condition (OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.83 to 0.98; p=0.02) or grouped by exposure type (OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.76 to 0.95; p=0.01). Findings of this meta-analysis suggest that vaccinations are not associated with the development of autism or autism spectrum disorder. Furthermore, the components of the vaccines (thimerosal or mercury) or multiple vaccines (MMR) are not associated with the development of autism or autism spectrum disorder., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This article demonstrates how misinformation concerning autism and vaccinations was created and suggests that social workers may be perfectly poised to challenge pseudoscience interpretations. Utilizing social network theory, this article illustrates how erroneous research, mass media, and public opinion led to a decreased use of vaccinations in the United States and a seven-fold increase in measles outbreaks. It traces the dissemination of spurious research results and demonstrates how information was transmitted via a system of social network nodes and community ties. This article encourages social workers, as frontline knowledge brokers, to counter misinformation, which may lead to significant public health consequences.

Thanks to vaccinations the incidence of many seriously debilitating or life threatening diseases and the resulting infant mortality or disability have been drastically reduced. In populations, who are no more aware of the risk of these infections, the attitude of suspicion and fear towards the vaccinations is expanding and in some cases reaches a worldwide media coverage as was the case for the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine (MMR). In 1998, a British doctor, Andrew Wakefield, and co-authors, published in "Lancet" a study in which he suggested the existence of "a new variant of autism" associated with intestinal inflammation. He proposed the administration of the MMR vaccine as a possible. cause of the inflammatory process. The hypothesis suggested by Wakefield led to a drastic drop in vaccination coverage in the UK and to the failure to achieve adequate levels of immunization in many countries, with a consequent increase in the incidence of measles and its complications. Wakefield work stimulated a broad discussion in the scientific community and many studies conducted over the next few years contradicted the research results of the English physician. In 2004, journalist Brian Deer conducted an accurate investigation that revealed how the Wakefield research presented many not regular aspects and was performed with predominantly economic objectives. In 2010, Wakefield was expelled from the General Medical Council, while the "Lancet" retracted the paper. The scientific research conducted in recent years confirm the inconsistency of the relationship between MMR vaccine and autism. The possible association with other factors, such as autoimmune processes, hyperactivation of mast cells in the hypothalamus, use of paracetamol in genetically predisposed children are currently investigated.

In 1998, a Lancet paper described 12 cases of children with autism, and having been vaccinated (MMR) in the United Kingdom; medias presented the information to the lay public, stating that a link was possible. In 2004, The Lancet published letters responding to allegations against the paper. Later, it was established that no link existed between MMR and autism; few years and many publications were necessary to conclude to the absence of evidence. In 2010, the General Medical Council published a report against Dr Wakefield, first author of the 1998 paper, and showing that the children hospital records did not contain the evidence; hospital records differed from the published paper; the Lancet retracted the 1998 paper. In 2011, Brian Deer, a journalist, published the complete story in theBMJ: in 1996, Wakefield was approached by lawyers representing an anti-vaccine lobby, and they supported the Wakefield research. Dr Wakefield left England; in 2012 he works in Texas, USA, for anti-vaccine lobbies., (Copyright © 2012. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.)

The paper of Wakefield et al. in The Lancet, triggered a negative reaction to the MMR vaccine, even though it was just a series of cases and the association between vaccination and autism could well be anecdotal. However, it was found that this association was spurious, not only because of hidden biases but also to alterations of the data and other improper behavior of the two authors that they were expelled from medical council. Finally, the article was removed from the magazine. This episode invites to think about the credibility and trust in the authorities and professionals to the population, as well as the suspicions that may arise when there are potential conflicts of interest among professionals, industry magazines and the population. A special area of interest is on the distorted expectations of health interventions, including vaccination, particularly with regard to both individual and collective prevention., (Copyright © 2011 SESPAS. Published by Elsevier España, S.L. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To provide strategies for immunization advocates on how best to participate in online discussion forums about immunization., Methods: Content and thematic analysis of an online discussion forum held following the national screening of a documentary about the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism scare. A subsample of branches containing more than 20 posts was analysed. Each distinct message (a "post") was coded for the author's manifest position on immunization, author type, topic, and evidence presented or sought., Results: From 103 distinct branches there were 1193 posts sent over a 3½ h period. We selected the 13 longest branches containing 466 posts from 166 individuals. One third of these individuals were explicitly critical of MMR immunization and one third sought information. The remainder were ambivalent but seeking no information (5%), supportive (14%), or unstated (15%). Among five author categories, only 4% identified themselves as health professionals. Topics included alleged adverse effects of immunization (35%); autism spectrum disorders treatment and causes (31%); vaccine ingredients (12%); a conspiracy (9%); immunization policies (8%); and measles, mumps or rubella (4%). Scientific concepts of evidence failed to compete with lay concepts and personal anecdotes prevailed., Conclusions: Health professionals and other advocates of immunization should engage in similar types of post-broadcast online discussion forums in a planned and strategic manner that accounts for the decision processes of lay people. This involves expanding and diversifying the support base of people contributing to the forum; setting the agenda; introducing messages known to influence behaviour; not overselling vaccination; and avoiding personal attacks., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

That vaccines do not cause autism is now a widely accepted proposition, though a few dissenters remain. An 8-year court process in the US federal vaccine injury compensation court ended in 2010 with rulings that autism was not an adverse reaction to vaccination. There were two sets of trials: one against the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and one against the mercury-based preservative thimerosal. The MMR story is more widely known because of publicity surrounding the main proponent of an MMR-autism link, British doctor Andrew Wakefield, but the story of thimerosal in court is largely untold. This study examines the credibility battles and boundary work in the two cases, illuminating the sustaining world of alternative science that supported the parents, lawyers, researchers, and expert witnesses against vaccines. After the loss in court, the families and their advocates transformed their scientific arguments into an indictment of procedural injustice in the vaccine court. I argue that the very efforts designed to produce legitimacy in this type of lopsided dispute will be counter-mobilized as evidence of injustice, helping us understand why settling a scientific controversy in court does not necessarily mean changing anyone's mind.

Scholars have examined how news media frame events, including responsibility for causing and fixing problems, and how these frames inform public judgment. This study analyzed 281 newspaper articles about a controversial medical study linking the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination with autism. Given criticism of the study and its potential negative impact on vaccination rates across multiple countries, the current study examined actors to whom news media attributed blame for the MMR-vaccine association, sources used to support those attributions, and what solutions (e.g., mobilizing information), if any, were offered. This study provides unique insight by examining the evolution of these attributions over the lifetime of the controversy. Findings emphasize how news media may attribute blame in health risk communication and how that ascription plays a potentially vital role in shaping public behavior. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

A number of issues related to vaccines and vaccinations in society are discussed in this paper. Our purpose is to merge an analysis of some recent changes in the vaccine market with social science research on the relationship between citizens and authorities. The article has two empirical parts. The first shows how the vaccine market, which for many years has had immense financial problems, nowadays seems to becoming economically vitalized, mostly due to the production of new and profitable vaccines. However prosperous the future may appear, certain reactions from the public regarding vaccination initiatives offer insight into inherent problems of vaccine policies in many Western countries. In the second part of the article, these problems are exemplified with the recent controversy over the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine. We conclude that in spite of the improving profit-margins, the vaccine market remains vulnerable and insecure. Vaccines are permeated by society, even more so than pharmaceutics that are used to cure or alleviate illnesses. Radical changes in financial conditions with promises of a more profitable market will not, we argue, solve other even more fundamental problems.

Objective: To educate pharmacists regarding the hypothesis that the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine is linked to the development of autism., Data Sources: Articles published from 1998 to 2009 were identified through electronic searches of Medline., Study Selection: Articles were included if they evaluated or reviewed a possible link between the MMR vaccine and autism or discussed MMR epidemiology, legal proceedings involving the MMR vaccine and autism, or health professionals' impact on immunization decisions., Data Synthesis: A total of 27 articles were identified. Of the articles, 74% (20 of 27) were included in the review because of their relevance to the study topic., Conclusion: The evidence presented does not show a causal relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism. Myths presented to potentially support any relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism have not been proven. Expert testimony refuting initial scientific theories has led to Supreme Court decisions that do not support a link between the MMR vaccine and autism. Pharmacists and all health care providers are responsible for informing and educating parents and families regarding this information so that they can make informed decisions about immunizations.

Objective: The first objective of the study was to determine whether there is a relationship between the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination and autism in children. The second objective was to examine whether the risk of autism differs between use of MMR and the single measles vaccine., Design: Case-control study., Study Population: The 96 cases with childhood or atypical autism, aged 2 to 15, were included into the study group. Controls consisted of 192 children individually matched to cases by year of birth, sex, and general practitioners., Methods: Data on autism diagnosis and vaccination history were from physicians. Data on the other probable autism risk factors were collected from mothers. Logistic conditional regression was used to assess the risk of autism resulting from vaccination. Assessment was made for children vaccinated (1) Before diagnosis of autism, and (2) Before first symptoms of autism onset. Odds ratios were adjusted to mother's age, medication during pregnancy, gestation time, perinatal injury and Apgar score., Results: For children vaccinated before diagnosis, autism risk was lower in children vaccinated with MMR than in the nonvaccinated (OR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.06-0.52) as well as to vaccinated with single measles vaccine (OR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.22-0.91). The risk for vaccinated versus nonvaccinated (independent of vaccine type) was 0.28 (95% CI: 0.10-0.76). The risk connected with being vaccinated before onset of first symptoms was significantly lower only for MMR versus single vaccine (OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.22-0.99)., Conclusions: The study provides evidence against the association of autism with either MMR or a single measles vaccine.