by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright June 26, 2007
All Rights Reserved.

nable to settle the score, parents of children with autism finally get their day in court, proving that vaccines, with or without the mercury-laced preservative thimerosol, cause childhood autism—a developmental disorder involving profound social, intellectual and emotional dysfunction. While cases vary in terms of severity, autism presents like a hybrid of mental retardation and schizophrenia, the latter exhibiting severe communication problems and withdrawal from reality. Families often find themselves at odds with the medical and pharmaceutical establishment, denying that any combination of drugs or antibodies, like the measles, mumps and rubella [MMR] vaccine, cause the disorder. Numerous scientific studies often supported by the drug industry contend there is no scientific link between autism and childhood vaccines. Parents with autistic children say otherwise.

      Alarming incidence of autism over the last 10 years has spawned numerous theories, most pointing toward vaccine makers. According to the Calif. State Dept. of Developmental Services between 1994 and 2004, autism cases rose from 4,911 to 25, 020, paving the way for today's Vaccine Court and trust fund totaling $2.5 billion. Autism Court currently has 4,800 pending cases. “For so long no one wanted to hear,” said 45-year-old housewife Theresa Cedillo, whose 12-year-old daughter Michelle, according to the family, developed autism following an MMR vaccine at 15 months. “Now someone wants to listen,” said Theresa, certainly not vaccine makers. Raising autistic children comes with unimaginable stress, sleepless nights and endless frustration. When given the chance to sue vaccine makers and physicians for “pain and suffering,” families relish the opportunity. Like other product-liability claims, the burden of proof lies with plaintiffs.

      Plaintiffs' attorneys find themselves fighting city hall, running up against deep-pocketed defense attorneys representing physicians and vaccine makers. “It is parents versus science,” said Kevin Conway, one of the Cedillo's attorneys in Vaccine Court. Attorneys must show “clear and convincing” evidence that plaintiffs' injuries were in fact caused by physicians and vaccines. Cedillos' daughter still wears diapers and communicates like a two-year-old. After taking the MMR at 15 months, Michelle developed a 105.8-degree fever, leaving her developmentally arrested. Some time later, she was diagnosed with autism. While all cases differ, Michelle's case may be less related to autism and more related to brain damage from high fever. If the vaccine caused the high fever, which, in turn, caused the brain damage, leading the autism diagnosis, the Cedillos may prevail.

      Defense attorneys often point toward the plethora of medical evidence denying any link between vaccines or the mercury-based preservative and childhood autism. Plaintiffs cite a 2006 British and French study finding significant concentration of mercury and other heavy metals in children diagnosed with neurological and developmental disorders, including autism. Vaccine makers have sponsored numerous scientific studies that dispute the connection between autism and other neurological and developmental disorders with childhood vaccines, with or without the preservative thimerosol. Fourteen scientific studies indicate that there's no link between thimerosol and autism. Yet the U.S. Public Health Service banned mercury-based preservatives from vaccines in 2001. Since mercury was removed, the incidence of autism has not significantly changed.

      Among 14 studies showing no link between thimerosol and autism, most were supported by vaccine and drug makers with a vested interest in showing no such link. When the Cedillo's child recovered from her MMR vaccine, she was not the same. “She was a whole different child,” said Theresa Cedillo, showing, if nothing else, that “something” changed their toddler. Like great global warming debate, the Cedillo's knew something caused their daughter's temperature to spike to dangerous levels. “Clear and convincing and reproducible,” said Dr. Paul Offit of Philadelphia Children's Hospital, referring to the lack of scientific evidence pointing to a link between thimerosol and autism. Drug makers and physicians point to genetic predispositions—not neurotoxins like thimerosol—causing autism. In the real world, multiple factors contribute to the end result.

      Arguing that there's no link between thimerosol and autism, the U.S. Public Health Service saw enough evidence to remove it from childhood vaccines in 2001. Establishing “Vaccine Court” and forcing vaccine makers to contribute to a $2.5 billion doesn't jibe with claims that absolutely no link exists. Armed with 14 scientific studies, vaccine and drug makers have no problem insisting there's no links among viral or antibody overload from vaccines, genetic predispositions and pervasive developmental disorders like autism. “Good science does apply,” said lead defense attorney Vince Matanoski, in opening statements at Cedillo's trial. “What has no place here in federal court is junk science,” criticizing suspect plaintiffs' claims. What Matanoski omits is the unavoidable fact that much of the “good” science has the expressed purpose of getting vaccine makers off the hook.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.