Other Vaccination & Immunization Articles

I've been noticing that there's a recent new(ish) complaint against people that are concerned about safety of vaccines. I've seen it in some blog posts, and seen it almost constantly in the online comment sections following various news articles and blog articles about vaccines.

The complaint is that people who question vaccines have been changing the nature of their argument over time. According to this complaint it started with people being concerned about mercury and thimerosal in vaccines. Over time, as thimerosal was removed (or reduced, as some critics would say) from vaccines, and as a corresponding decrease in autism was not apparent, the "anti-vaccine" people changed their argument. Now they claim that aluminum, formaldehyde and polysorbate 80, etc. are the basis for concern about vaccines.

Apparently some people find this to be some fatal flaw, and from this it apparently follows that any criticism of vaccines is trumped automatically. But I don't see that this point has (or should have) any weight.

First of all, points in scientific discussion and debates change over time. Not only do they change, they ought to change in response to advances in knowledge and to changes in thinking. Anyone who stays wedded to the first idea they had is either truly perfect, or is a little too invested in being correct.

Consider the medical quest to treat ulcers. Physicians and researchers considered excess stomach acid production to be the cause of ulcers for decades. They even tried crazy things like freezing the lining of the stomach to try and reduce acid production until gastric linings started sloughed off and causing lots of bleeding. I'm glad no one got in their way and said that they couldn't change their theory halfway through, or was upset because they modified their position in light of further experience.

Furthermore, at least with regards to asthma, allergies and autism, it is reasonable to have a heightened and continuing sense of concern about vaccines, since they are direct attempts to alter the immune system. Lots of children with autism seem to have immunological problems, and asthma and allergies are both dysfunctions of the immune system. I'm not remotely suggesting there is evidence of anything causal because of this, but I do think it means it is well worth thinking about and looking at vaccines carefully, since we're manipulating the immune system in ways that are not well understood, and we've got a lot of children appearing with immune problems.

Secondly, the increases in neurological problems, asthma/allergies, ADD and ADHD, bipolar disorder and autistic spectrum disorders in children ARE happening concomitantly with the increases in the number of vaccines that children get. This is obviously another concern NOT causative on its face, but why does that then make it somehow crazy to want to examine vaccines more closely, as well as their constituent parts?

And finally, if the concerns about vaccines, and their components are so ridiculous and ill-founded, then why aren't the easy rebuttals just trotted out instead of crying not fair, they changed the game? For myself, I'd prefer that to all these pointless charges of fallacious argument, and I'm sure there are lots of others who are listening for that as well.