Paul Offit meets Stephen Colbert!

In some areas, there was a lot of "buzz" about Paul Offit's appearance, last night, on the Stephen Colbert television show.  There was a Facebook page dedicated to the "event," and a rather heated debate place between anti-vaxers and Offit supporters.  


Some early posts on the FB page had indicated that some anti-vaxers were expecting Colbert to skewer Offit.  Those viewers were, no doubt, deeply disappointed.  Colbert's questioning of Offit was done in a way that gave Offit ample opportunity to explain his position, and for Colbert to throw some funny barbs in the direction of the anti-vax crowd.  It was just silly enough to be Colbert, and serious enough to get the point across.  


The vitriol that was being posted on the FB page was amazing, to me.  There was at least one person, maybe more, who seemed to be spending her whole day just posting - one post after another.  The thing is, her posts made no sense.  She posted quote after quote and link after link.  The links often did not prove her point, or even contradicted her point.  The claims that are so often made, that Wakefield's study had been replicated, were repeated like a mantra, but the links showed that those studies did not prove what the posters claimed they did.  Two or three of the five studies were, in fact, not really studies at all - they were case studies of one, two or three individuals who had ASD and gastrointestinal disorders.  That proves nothing about a link between the two.  Only one of the "studies" even comes close to being a replication of the Wakefield finding, and that was performed by ... Wakefield's group in Texas!  Not, exactly, an unbiased, disinterested source.  The finding is merely that there is some correlation (not significant, if I recall correctly) between ASD and GI issues.  That still doesn't link vaccines with ASD.


The moving target issue - first it was MMR, then it was thimerisol, then it was the number of vaccines ... - is huge.  But the bottom line for the anti-vaxers seems to be that it HAS to be the vaccines, even if they have no idea what it is.


I want to be clear here.  I know that some children have been injured by vaccines.  It happens, and it's awful.  It's also very, very rare.  For those children, and those families, and those friends, it is tragic.  Like just about everything else, there is a cost-risk analysis that says that the risk of those injuries is small enough that the benefit, for the vast majority of people, makes it worthwhile.  Clearly, for that person, it wasn't - but one never knows who that person will be.  NO ONE claims that vaccines are 100% safe.  Nothing in life is.  Not getting vaccinated isn't safe either.  And therein is the rub.  


While Age of Autism is vilifying Offit for his supposed blind adherence to all vaccines, they ignore the fact that he was the doctor who fought AGAINST continuing to vaccinate against small pox when the risk benefit analysis moved to the point where the risk became too high to justify continuing to administer the vaccine.  The histrionic opposition to vaccines is every bit as thoughtless as they accuse people of being when they "blindly" follow all the directions of their doctors.  


Personally, I wouldn't consider rejecting a tetanus shot for myself or my children.  The idea appalls me!  The standard vaccines, for me, are non-negotiable.  What about the others?  I don't get flu shots.  I still think there's too much hit-and-miss with the annual mix, and the annual angst about whether they got this year's right.  I'm also concerned about recent studies showing a link between flu shots and later development of Alzheimer's.  I'm also not approving the Gardisell (sp?) for my sons - I think that vaccine was rushed to market with inadequate testing and the testing for boys was even worse than that for girls.  But as far as meningitis, MMR, chicken pox, hib, Hepatitis, - my kids had all of those, and I would never second-guess myself on them.