Actually, the Japanese, who had followed this discussion, decided to postpone the measles vaccination, after which the autism rate in young children suddenly and spectacularly dropped.
The only study I'm aware of is from 2005 and it shows nothing of the sort. Is there some new data that shows a change in trend later on? If so, how do we account for the timing?
Funny enough, Prof. John Walker-Smith had the money to actually appeal the decision of the GMC in court, and was vindicated by the judge. So he (and Wakefield) was right after all.
What was the ruling, specifically? I'm having a hard time finding it. Given the truly damning findings against Wakefield, I'm very interested in seeing which ones they repudiated and why.
However, later the CDC found out by itself that MMR led in a disproportional way to much more cases of autism in African Americans than in white Americans.
Do you have a source for that?
22 Vaccines from Birth to 15 months alone. You are so 100% sure that 22 schedule is safe and effective? Without Proof or even evidence? That is sciency, not science.
If you have proper statistics, you should be able to draw some pretty solid epidemiological conclusions from them, even without a double-blind study. Different age cohorts will get a different vaccine schedule because, as you note, it changes over time. You can also run comparisons against other countries with different vaccination schedules. So far, I don't see any evidence that anything troubling is going on, but maybe you have something interesting to share?
This sounds a lot like the "cell phones cause cancer" stuff. No, there has never been a specific double-blind study to test it, but there's tons of aggregate data, and it looks to me like we've had to torture the data pretty hard to get a positive result, so I'm pretty satisfied that I don't need to worry too much.
Tomorrow's computers some time next month. -- DEC