It’s rare that both sides of an argument sound so similar, yet argue so vehemently, as they do in the ongoing vaccine debate. Each side claims the other is “brainwashed, misrepresenting the facts, ignoring data and putting every child’s health at risk.” Both sides throw in scientific jargon and statistics that are difficult to follow but sure sound impressive. Whether it’s the money from the vaccine industry or profits from lawsuits and alternative treatments, each side claims that the other side’s experts are bought and paid for, being dishonest for personal gain.

They yell, holler, their blood-pressure rises. It’s getting ugly out there.

Can the layman get to the bottom of this? I set out to do some intensive research, diving into the studies in question to try to discern who, in fact, is ignoring data and misrepresenting the facts. It’s the information age, and many of the relevant studies are freely available online. Still, it’s a daunting task to work through these technical studies and even more daunting because the vaccine debate has spread to so many areas. The list of maladies for which vaccines are allegedly implicated is ever-increasing. I picked one claim, one of the oldest claims from the anti-vaccine camp, to begin my research.

There has been a long-standing concern that vaccines cause autism. At first, they faulted the MMR vaccine for the rapidly increasing autism rates. Then, they argued that mercury in some other vaccines was the primary cause. Although MMR never contained mercury, it was decided that mercury was the actual culprit. Even now that mercury has been almost completely removed from all vaccines, the concerns persist because it is still used as a preservative in some flu vaccines.

The opposing arguments go like this:

Anti-vaccines: Hundreds of studies demonstrate that the mercury in vaccines cause autism.

Pro-vaccines: Numerous large-scale studies have demonstrated that autism rates continued to rise even after mercury was decreased or even removed from vaccines. If mercury in vaccines was causing autism, the rates should have decreased. They didn’t. They continued to rise.

Both sides sound convincing. After sifting through many of the studies in question, I can now tell you with absolute certainty that one of these is a fallacy.

For good reason, many people don’t have the time or patience to work through the data. Many prefer jumping to conclusions based on anecdotal evidence or salacious stories about some of the people on the other side. Or, they are convinced by a very one-sided book they read. Or, very often, they trust someone who was convinced by one of these unreliable sources.

I was once introduced to a self-appointed ambassador for the anti-vaccination movement. Like a missionary with his bible, cheat-sheet, and rehearsed “questions”, this yungermancame to me with one of these books in hand. When I asked him about his research beyond this one book, he admitted that he was unable to ever look up any of the studies on his own because he didn’t have internet access. But, he assured me that the book he read was very convincing. Apparently so.

For those of you who can’t wait, the bottom line is that this claim from the anti-vaccination camp is not based on facts. They may list studies, link to them, count them off with passion and gusto, but the overwhelming majority of those studies do not remotely support their claim.

Well-intentioned, intelligent people are getting misled by these claims. And, everyone agrees the stakes are high. People are contracting deadly diseases. One baby in Israel has already died. As I’ve done a significant amount of research and hard work looking into these questions, I feel a responsibility to do my part in trying to clear up some of the confusion. Unfortunately, studies have shown that scientific data does not sway those who already bought into the conspiracy theories of this dangerous movement; it only causes them to become more entrenched in their misguided views. I am writing these articles to help save families who are starting to genuinely look into this matter and are perhaps confused by the abundance of misinformation available on the internet and in print.

I am a mechanech with no financial stake in this debate. I will say that patience, the primary requirement for running a yeshiva for teenage bochurim, certainly served me well in the tedious work of going through these many studies. Let’s jump into it.

Everyone agrees that mercury can be harmful. The evil CDC acknowledges this obvious fact. If you drown a cell in mercury and leave it in a test tube, the cell will be harmed. However, numerous, extremely large-scale studies have shown no connection between mercury in vaccines and autism. (1) Why? It is because, as the CDC explains, the mercury in vaccines is such a small dose and passes through the body so quickly that it does not cause harm. (2) This is a point that anti-vaxxers have trouble internalizing. The basic principle of toxicology that ‘the dose makes the poison’ (3) is also generally lost on them. The overwhelming majority of anti-vaxxers’ supposed “hundreds” of studies are done in ways that do not mirror these key characteristics: The tests were not done with extremely small doses going through a live, human body.

On the other hand, the CDC’s studies are addressing this very question. And, they are impressive, covering huge populations, with millions of subjects (4). You probably remember from middle school that scientific studies are more reliable when they have larger samples. The reason for this is to avoid mistakenly giving more weight to outliers, the exceptions to the rule. The CDC’s studies track immunization rates and autism rates of huge populations in parts of this country as well as other countries.

Before we get to the results of the CDC’s studies, as an aside, it’s amusing to consider the magnitude of these enormous-scale studies in contrast to the anti-vaxxers beloved, now-discredited, study from Dr. Andrew Wakefield (5) through which he started spreading fear about a link between vaccines and autism. His study consisted of asking questions to 12 parents of children with autism. 12 subjects!

The CDC’s data shows that autism rates continued to rise even after mercury was virtually eliminated from vaccines. The rates continued to rise – which means that each successive year more children were diagnosed with autism than the year before – even after mercury was removed from vaccines. So, anti-vaxxers have been screaming from the hilltops for decades that mercury is causing the autism epidemic. Now, we drastically reduced the mercury intake for all babies and children, the mercury which supposedly caused the autism epidemic. Why didn't removing mercury cause the rates to plummet? Had the autism rates stayed the same, this would already have been an enormous problem for the anti-vaxxers. But, the autism rates actually went up for most of the years following the mercury reduction, making this more than an enormous question for the anti-vaccination camp; this is a nuclear bomb.

Let’s go through the feeble attempts by the anti-vaccination camp to talk away this problem:

Attempt 1:

They say: There were still old vaccines that were left over from previous years.

The facts: The last mercury-containing vaccines (with the exception of some flu vaccines) expired by January of 2003. After that point, the autism rates continued to rise! And, even prior to that point there still was a reduction in mercury that, according to their theory, should have made the autism rates plummet (6).

Attempt 2:

They say: Although mercury was removed from almost all vaccines, there was still mercury in flu vaccines given to pregnant mothers and infants.

The facts: This is clearly not a legitimate point for several reasons. First, some of the CDC’s studies were done in countries where mercury was completely removed from vaccines, even the flu vaccines. Still, their autism rates increased (7).

Furthermore, even in the United States, there was an enormous reduction in the amount of mercury that would have reached a baby – which should have caused a decrease, not an increase, in the autism rates. Consider these numbers: During many of the relevant years, only ~10-11 percent of pregnant mothers and infants received the flu vaccine (8). Of those mothers and infants, many received the flu vaccines without mercury. Of the remaining mothers, many received their shots prior to pregnancy (8), with the mercury rapidly leaving their bloodstream, as the half-life of mercury in vaccines is less than a week (9). For the remaining, very, very small subset, the amount of mercury in a flu shot would still have been a fraction of the amount that infants were receiving beforehand (10). So, this could not possibly justify the continued increase of autism rates. Based on their “theory” that mercury was the cause of the autism rates increasing, a decrease in mercury should have led to a decrease in autism.

I think they realize that these answers, literally, don’t add up. That’s why they try this next brilliant sleight of hand.

Attempt 3:

They say: With the reduction of mercury, the autism rates would have gone down, but at that very same moment that mercury was removed, a new vaccine was added to the recommended schedule that included aluminum. And, yup, they claim that aluminum in vaccines also causes autism. Ah, the ever-morphing, unfounded certainties of the anti-vaxxers.

The facts: It’s brilliant and creative! It just doesn’t match the data. In Denmark, they started getting rid of mercury in the 1980s and completely eliminated its use by 1992, 8 years before we did so in the United States. They also saw rises in autism rates after 1992. However, here's the punchline: Denmark didn’t recommend the aluminum-containing vaccine until 2007 (11). In other words, they eliminated mercury earlier than we did, and introduced aluminum later than we did. Still, their autism rates didn't plummet; they continued to rise during those 15 years when there was no mercury or aluminum in the vaccines!

Part of the challenge of convincing these folks is that, as the data proves them wrong, they keep shifting their arguments. The allegations are in constant flux: which vaccines are the culprits, which ingredients within the vaccines, which diseases and disorders they cause. The moving target is tiring and telling.

They somehow don’t realize how ridiculous it sounds that they keep changing their arguments. Yes, many "things" can cause harm, but when a movement of people keep trying to find harmful aspects and effects of the same thing, it becomes pretty clear to the rest of us that they are not being objective.

The anti-vaccination camp claims to have lots of evidence to support their theories. Every one of these claims that I have heavily researched thus far, has turned out to be completely unfounded, very often based on blatant and egregious misreadings of scientific studies. Iy"H, more articles will be forthcoming in which we will uncover more of these fabricated “proofs”. For now, please don’t be misled or pulled into the sensationalistic conspiracy theories.

Rabbi Chanina Szendro is the Menahel of a local Baltimore Mesivta, Yeshivas Toras Chaim, located at 3407 Clarks Lane.

Footnotes

1. Nine of the many studies are listed here: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/pdf/cdcstudiesonvaccinesandautism.pdf

You can also find an impressive list here: https://www.healthychildren.org/English/safety-prevention/immunizations/Pages/Vaccine-Studies-Examine-the-Evidence.aspx

2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27161558

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/patient-ed/conversations/downloads/vacsafe-thimerosal-color-office.pdf

3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3153292/

4. Here are just a few of the many, many studies:

This one study of 467,000 children born in Denmark between 1990 and 1996 comparing children who were vaccinated with a mercury-containing vaccine to children who received a mercury-free formulation of the same vaccine: Anders Hviid, MSc; Michael Stellfeld, MD; Jan Wohlfahrt, MSc; et al Mads Melbye, MD, PhD (2003) Association Between Thimerosal-Containing Vaccine and Autism. JAMA. 2003;290(13) https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/197365

This study of 109,863 children in the United Kingdom analyzed thimerosal exposure and possible development delays: Andrews N, et al., Thimerosal Exposure in Infants and Developmental Disorders: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the United Kingdom Does Not Support a Causal Association. Pediatrics. 2004; 114(3) http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/114/3/584

Here is an example of a study of the MMR vaccine. This study of 537,303 children, looking at the autism rates of children who received the MMR vaccine versus not vaccinated children: Madsen KM, et al., A Population-Based Study of Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Vaccination and Autism. New England Journal of Medicine. 2002; 347(19) https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa021134.

5. Wakefield et al. (1998) RETRACTED: Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. The Lancet volume 351, issue 9103, 637-641 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(97)11096-0/fulltext

6. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/thimerosal/timeline.html

7. https://www.fourteenstudies.org/pdf/HG_2.pdf - Also, see https://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2013/02/25/denmark/ for additional studies that looked at autism rates in Denmark.

8. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pdf/professionals/NHIS89_08fluvaxtrendtab.pdf

9. http://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/committee/topics/thiomersal/statement_jul2006/en/

10. Around 25 micrograms versus 200 micrograms. X Wu, H Liang, K A. O’Hara, J C. Yalowich, and B. Hasinoff (2008) Thiol-Modulated Mechanisms of the Cytotoxicity of Thimerosal and Inhibition of DNA. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2008, 21, 483–493. And Ball, L. K., Ball, R., and Pratt, R. D. (2001) An assessment of thimerosal use in childhood vaccines. Pediatrics 107, 1147–1154.

11.https://www.ssi.dk/English/PublicHealth/Vaccination/The%20Danish%20Childhood%20Vaccination%20Programme/Q%20and%20A/Pneumococcal%20Vaccination.aspx